writetoknow

Joined

Posts by writetoknow

posted

65
144,000 resurrected BEFORE Jesus rose?
by tula in
1. watchtower
2. bible
according to matthew 27:52-53.

(this occurred during the time when jesus was being crucified).

"and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.".
writetoknow

Did you know there is more than one type of resurrection described in scripture? Did you know Christ experienced two different kinds of resurrection?

386
386 anastasis {an-as'-tas-is}
from 450; TDNT - 1:371,60; n f
AV - resurrection 39, rising again 1, that should rise 1,
raised to life again + 1537 1; 42
1) a raising up, rising (e.g. from a seat)
2) a rising from the dead
2a) that of Christ
2b) that of all men at the end of this present age
2c) the resurrection of certain ones history who were restored
to life (Heb. 11:35)

NT:386
anastasis (an-as'-tas-is); from NT:450; a standing up again, i.e. (literally) a resurrection from death (individual, genitive case or by implication [its author]), or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth):

KJV - raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

Resurrection has more than one meaning so it is important to know them all and how they are used in scriptural context.

One is the resurrection of Christ and he actually experienced two types of resurrections.

The first is written here:

Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Note how it says Christ had a resurrection right after he died! This is over 3 days before the more common type of resurrection that is known when he arose and left his tomb.

This kind of resurrection where you rise up out of your human body into a spiritual body. It is also referred to as the "resurrection of the dead":

1 Corinthians 15:12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
1 Corinthians 15:13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
1 Corinthians 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
1 Corinthians 15:16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
1 Corinthians 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
1 Corinthians 15:18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.

Here Paul speaks against two schools of thought. One is that the dead remain dead until some future time where they rise, and the other is that the dead simply never rise. What Paul is saying here is that if the dead do not rise right after dying (a visible example of this shown in Matthew 27:52-53) then Christ also did not rise after dying. Christ did not remain in his literal grave but went to the the dead to preach to them. This proves he resurrected after death and was alive even after dying and all this before he returned to his corpse and it was then resurrected through transfiguration which essentially changes the human body into the spiritual body and in His case his physical scars remained.

Matthew 22:31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
Matthew 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

God is the God of the living so when we do die, we resurrect into a new body. However, all who are not found in the book of life on judgement day have what is known as a "mortal soul". Being in this new spiritual body does not guarantee eternal life.

Luke 20:35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:

I also like this wording because it shows a resurrection from the dead.

1537
1537 ek {ek} or ex {ex}

a primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence action or
motion proceeds), from, out (of place, time, or cause; literal
or figurative;; prep

AV - of 367, from 181, out of 162, by 55, on 34, with 25, misc 97; 921

1) out of, from, by, away from

Luke 20:35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection [away from] the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:

This simply means all are raised up and resurrect from the state of human death and no not actually remain in a lifeless state of being. All who die essentially are "the living dead" meaning they are alive but they did in fact die a human death. Another useage of the term "dead" would refer to those souls who did not overcome and therefore essentially have a soul that shall be killed. Though they are alive for now, they in fact died a human death and also are "dead" (or will be) in more complex of ways.

So then, the same resurrection that Christ experienced takes place when a person dies. The difference between Christ and the rest is that he was to return to his corpse and it would be transfigured into the new body he had. This was to fulfill prophecy and show visibly that he was alive but most people who die do not have this happen to them.

So we have the resurrection after death which occurs very quickly, probably instantly where one rises back to God and also receives a new body, the spiritual or as some have named the "heavenly" or "angelic" body. Whatever you call it, that's what a soul receives after leaving the human body.

Acts 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

Here we read of the second type of resurrection Christ experienced which was when he left hell (not the lake of fire type of hell but the type known as the grave, where the unsaved dead go after they die. Christ went there to preach) and returned to his corpse so that the transfiguration of his spiritual body and his former human body could merge.

So we have a first resurrection right when he died that triggered a literal resurrection of the dead bodies of human beings. Some of the dead bodies literally came back to life, the soul returning to it, and these people were once again actually living human beings again. These did not transfigure as Christ would however. These left their spiritual bodies and returned to their former bodies which were reanimated back to full human life. These also would eventually have to die again.

Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

1454
1454 egersis {eg'-er-sis}
from 1453; TDNT - 2:337,195; n f
AV - resurrection 1; 1

1) a rousing, excitation
2) a rising up
3) resurrection from the dead

I will also mention that this particular word is used one time in all of scripture. The root word is used 141 times but this version is special and only used this one time and I believe it is because this resurrection was not the same as his corpse resurrection.

The entire reason he had a corpse resurrection was to give a physical sign of the spiritual resurrection that cannot be seen. Amen?

There is over 3 days difference in the two resurrections. I believe it is fact that the dead saints were awake and in open graves when Christ's spirit resurrected and I submit that logic and the text says they got up and went into the city right then.

Matthew 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Matthew 27:54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

I submit that all these events are written in chronological order and the "saw the earthquake, and those things that were done" proves that all those events happened on the same day and all were witnessed by others.

Matthew 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
Matthew 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Here we have a series of things that occurred right after he died:

1: veil torn
2: earth quake
3: rocks rent
4: graves opened
5: saints arose
6: saints leave graves
7: saints enter the city

All these things happen as soon as Christ died. Since we all know the spirit returns to God right after death, then that is a resurrection.

1454
1454 egersis {eg'-er-sis}
from 1453; TDNT - 2:337,195; n f
AV - resurrection 1; 1
1) a rousing, excitation
2) a rising up
3) resurrection from the dead

His spirit experienced "a rising up" and a "rousing" when it left his dead body.

Matthew 27:54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

Here we see that the centurion "saw the earthquake, and those things that were done"

Luke 23:42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
Luke 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

How else could Christ say to the thief on the cross, “To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.”? The thief too was spiritually resurrected to heaven at the moment of his physical death, because Christ had already gone into heaven. The promise was TODAY, so Christ’s resurrection too must have been spiritual, how else could Christ promise the thief that he would be with Him that day in paradise (heaven)?

Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
Luke 20:35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
Luke 20:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
Luke 20:37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
Luke 20:38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

"Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush"

This means that those who have died in the past have resurrected from the dead human body and to prove this Moses is mentioned because he died and yet he was seen alive long before the more commonly known type of resurrection which happens at the end. Moses was resurrected at the moment of physical death and is used to demonstrate that fact.

Another more complex type is the resurrection of believers that takes place at the Second Coming of Christ.

Luke 14:14 And thou shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.

This is known as the "resurrection of the just" which differs from the resurrection of the dead or "from the dead" which the just and the unjust experience. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus also documents this fact.

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Revelation 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

This type of ressurection is the one that occurs when Christ returns and it happens to those that "were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands" which means those who died in the tribulation because they refused to take the mark of the beast as well as those who refused the mark of the beast but who survived the tribulation. These are the 144,000 who will be the ones Paul said would not die but would be changed in a twinkling of an eye and be changed. So what they have in common is that both refused the mark of the beast and both cannot be hurt of the second death which means they have eternal life guaranteed even though this is before judgement day. That is know as the "first resurrection" and has nothing to do with any type of bodily resurrection but it's a spiritual resurrection to eternal life.

Being that a first resurrection is mentioned here and its eternal life for some, there will be a second kind of this resurrection and that is on judgement day when those whose names are found in the book of life are given eternal life. This will be the second example of this form of resurrection.

John 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

And here is the opposite to this type of resurrection to life, a resurrection to damnation. They were fully alive like the rich man but waited to be "resurrected" to face judgement:

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

1: A resurrection of or from the dead human body. All experience this resurrection when they die.
2: A resurrection of the dead human body itself, restored back to complete human life.
3: A resurrection from a resurrected state back to merge into and transfigure the human body (Christ's second resurrection)
4: A resurrection of the just at the second coming. This is when they will know they have eternal life and that the second death cannot hurt them.
5: A resurrection of damnation for those whose names are not written in the book of life.

Hebrews 11:35 Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: __________________
1Peter 3:15
(BBE) But give honour to Christ in your hearts as your Lord; and be ready at any time when you are questioned about the hope which is in you, to give an answer in the fear of the Lord and without pride;
65
144,000 resurrected BEFORE Jesus rose?
by tula in
1. watchtower
2. bible
according to matthew 27:52-53.

(this occurred during the time when jesus was being crucified).

"and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.".
writetoknow

Interpretation and Theology
by Randall Watters
Biblical Overview
"How can I interpret this passage?" we ask. Can most passages in the Bible be interpreted any number of ways? Were the parables of Jesus meant to be rich with hidden allegories and detailed significance? Are there no grammatical rules for interpreting the Bible?
Yes, there are. They are basically the same rules used to determine the historical significance of any ancient document that has become obscure due to changes in culture, ethics and philosophy. They are the same basic rules that we would follow to determine the meaning of the writings of Shakespeare, Aesop, Plato or Hippocrates. When a person uses these rules to determine the meaning of ancient or even contemporary documents, it is called hermeneutics. When these rules are applied to interpreting the Holy Scriptures, we call it hermeneutic theology.
Webster's dictionary defines the word thusly:
hermeneutics, n. the science of interpretation, or of finding the meaning of the author's words and phrases, and explaining it to others; exegesis: particularly applied to the interpretation of the Scriptures.
Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia points out, "The basic word `hermeneutics' (Greek: hermenia, verb hermeneuo) means `to interpret,' `to expound,' `to explain,' and further includes translating from a foreign language into a familiar language (John 1:38,42; 9:7)."
Hermeneutics relative to the study of the Word of God is vital to an understanding of God's timeless revelation to men. When the principles of hermeneutics are ignored, not only have men misinterpreted the Word, but they promulgate falsehood and deceive others. We cannot underestimate the importance of knowing the rules of hermeneutics, for in them lies the defeat of all cultic and sectarian theology. So often a discussion with those of the cults is reduced to a game of "scriptural checkers," where each person has a list of scriptures they intend to use in order to prove their point, and the confrontation becomes a standoff; each leaving, at best, with the idea that perhaps there is more than one way to interpret key doctrinal passages. While prophecy and divine revelation may at times be ambiguous (since the events are yet future), most passages in the Bible have one obvious interpretation.
Those who either intentionally or unwittingly pervert key texts often seek out alternate definitions of certain Greek or Hebrew words in order to justify their interpretation, yet the particular meaning ascribed to does not fit the context in their application.
WHEN SHOULD HERMENEUTICAL PRINCIPLES BE APPLIED?
When something isn't clear. Bernard Ramm, author of Protestant Biblical Interpretation, (p.7,8) says that hermeneutical principles are required when "something hinders . . . spontaneous understanding." This can occur often, as we live in another time and place than when the text was written down. There is therefore a historical gap. There is a cultural gap; in that our culture is different. There is a linguistic gap; in that the text is usually in a different language. There is the geographical gap; in that the document originates in another country. Since there is sometimes a totally different attitude towards life and the universe, it can be said that there is a philosophical gap as well.
Ramm points out that our great need for the science of hermeneutics is to bridge the gap between our minds and the minds of the Biblical writers. People of the same culture, same age and same geographical location understand each other with ease. Patterns of interpretation commence with childhood and early speech behavior, and by the time adulthood is reached the principles of interpretation are so self-evident that we are not aware of them. But when the interpreter is separated culturally, historically, and geographically from the writer he seeks to interpret, the task of interpretation is no longer simple. The greater the cultural, historical, and geographical divergences are, the more difficult is the task of interpretation.
In reading the Bible, we find the most obvious difficulty is that of language. The Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. To formulate rules to bridge this gap is one of the most important tasks of Biblical hermeneutics. . . . It taxes the learning and judgment of the wisest scholars to decide out of the pool of meanings which is the meaning intended in a given sentence, and then try to match it with some word in the English language; which word may itself express a pool of meanings.
The following are necessary rules:
1. Determine the meaning of the original language of any passage as the original readers would have understood it. Ideally, this calls for a knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Practically speaking, it means the interpreter needs to use the best translations of the Bible available to him. In this connection he ought to learn something of the purpose for which the author wrote and the historical circumstances out of which the writing arose.
The Scriptures are part of a larger historical and cultural context. In the OT, Israel was related, in one way or another, to the Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians (to name a few); in the NT the church emerged from a Jewish background and arose in the Greco-Roman world. The languages of the Bible reflect these various cultures; thus the interpreter must be knowledgeable of and sensitive to the use of words in their various settings.
2. Interpret the words of any given verse or paragraph within its immediate context. The context is the ultimate determinate of word meanings. While the dictionary will provide various possibilities, the context will aid in narrowing the choice.
3. Discover the literary nature of the passage under study. Is it to be taken in the natural, normal sense of the language? Or is it figurative? Is it a narrative of events? Or is it a discourse meant to teach us a specific idea? This calls for some knowledge of customs within the culture involved.
Often there is no problem in deciding matters of this kind. For example, the parables of Jesus are regarded as illustrations of ideas; figurative language to clarify concepts.
4. Interpret the Bible in terms of the principle of progressive revelation. Put simply, this means that God revealed things dispensationally, not all at one time. Partly, this was because of the stages in which the Divine program was being fulfilled (Heb. 1:1,2); partly, because of man's state of unreadiness to receive and understand the message (John 16:12). On occasion, this principle involved adding to what had been given earlier. Jesus told his disciples, "I have yet many things to say to you, but ye cannot bear them now." (John 16:12)
5. Interpret the language in the Bible regarding the natural world as that of appearance and popular rather than technical and scientific. The Bible does not theorize about nature; it simply states facts in an un-technical manner.
THE HISTORICAL, GRAMMATICAL, INTERPRETIVE METHOD
Dr. David L. Cooper has eloquently stated a proper definition of the historical, grammatical, interpretive method when he declares, "When the plain sense of scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise." (Dr. D.L. Cooper, The Messianic Series, parts 14, p. 3)
When we speak of the historical, grammatical, interpretive method, we are speaking of allowing a given text within its historical, grammatical, geographical and cultural setting to speak for itself. Ramm says,
Whenever we read a book, an essay, or a poem we presume the literal sense in the document until the nature of the literature may force us to another level. This is the only conceivable method of beginning or commencing to understand literature of all kinds. The non-literal is always a secondary meaning which presumes an already existing literal understanding of literature. This previous stratum of language is the necessary point of departure for the interpretation of all literature. If we attempt to read some Oriental, mystical book we shall first attempt to understand it literally; and when we see that procedure is not doing justice to the text, we then forsake the literal program for a mystical, allegorical or metaphorical one. Therefore, without prejudging the nature of Holy Scripture one way or another (whether there is a deeper or more profound meaning expressed typologically, allegorically, mythologically, or existentially), we must start our interpretation of Holy Scripture from the stance of literal or philological interpretation. (Ramm, ibid., p.123,124)
So, in other words, there are sound rules for interpreting the Bible, common sense rules; that apply in interpreting virtually any historic literature. If the cultist ignores or rejects these rules of interpretation, then he must also reject the sum total of ancient literary writings available to us today; as they are all interpreted by basically the same rules mentioned above. This is an exceedingly valuable point to establish first in your discussion with Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, etc. Ask, what methods of interpretation they use. How do they determine the meaning of a particular text? Press the issue with them until they give an answer! If they recognize the value of the historical, grammatical, interpretive method, then you can proceed to systematically dismantle their entire theological framework piece by piece.
THEOLOGY
Proper theology protects us from false teaching. Jesus refuted the teachings of the Pharisees, Paul and John refuted the false teachings of the Gnostics and the early heretics, and so must Christians today.
The working out of a theology in understandable, logical patterns (usually called systematic theology) is a forced issue, necessitated by heresy itself. For example, the early Christians worshipped the Father and Christ as God and knew them to be eternal, and recognized the Personality of the Holy Spirit. But there appeared to be no need of defining their theology further until these beliefs were attacked by heretics. Gnosticism, Marcionism, and Montanism (early heresies) soon made it apparent what would happen to Christianity if it had no generally accepted canons of scripture and faith. Apologetics, now called the defense of the faith, began as the defense of the faithful. When there are no fixed, clearly acknowledged standards, the wildest and most fanciful notions can become mixed in with basic Christian doctrines and it becomes very hard to separate them. Thus we cannot avoid the study of theology as some would naively suggest. Any religion whose doctrine is attacked by dissidents (just as Christian doctrine was in the days of the apostles) must further define their theology in order to combat heresy, or their doctrinal structure will suffer.
IS IT ACCEPTABLE TO USE PHILOSOPHICAL TERMS IN THEOLOGICAL STUDIES?
Harold O.J. Brown says this about the influence of Hellenistic thinking upon doctrine:
It is evident that Trinitarian theology required the aid of Hellenistic concepts and categories for its development and expression, but they were the tools by means of which the implications of the New Testament were realized; they were not foreign concepts imposed upon an essentially simple message.
The adoption of the Nicene Creed in 325 and the Chalcedonian Creed in 451 stabilized the doctrines of the Trinity and Christ for over one thousand years. They made use of Hellenistic categories and thinking to do so. The important question to ask is not whether orthodox theology betrays Hellenistic influence. Nothing else was possible in the cultural climate of the time. The important question is whether this orthodoxy represents a proper and correct interpretation of New Testament Christology or whether it seriously distorts it. (Heresies, p. 146, 105)
How can we illustrate the need to further define doctrine using the NT as an example? Well, Jesus never developed the doctrine of salvation to the extent that Paul does in his letters to the Romans and Galatians. Jesus never defined the details of the heavenly resurrection as does Paul in 1 Corinthians chapter 15. Jesus never elaborated on the antitypical symbolism of the Temple and its furniture, such as we find in Hebrews; there we find a theology developed through reason and logic, plus the inspiration of the Spirit. The OT and the words of Jesus contained the principles, or foundations, upon which to build this theology, but contained no developed concept of these subjects such as we find in Hebrews and the writings of Paul.
When the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus Christ was challenged, Paul came to the rescue in 1 Corinthians 15:1258 with a well-developed refutation of those who denied the bodily resurrection of Christ. Why did Paul not let the opposers alone? Weren't the simple statements of Jesus on the resurrection adequate enough to silence unbelievers? Evidently not, for Paul feared the skeptics would eventually destroy the congregations with their heresies. The Gnostics were also a very formidable threat to the early church, so the apostle John put forth effort in refuting them in his writings. SUCH REBUTTALS AS THESE WERE NOT NECESSARY IN THE BEGINNING! Jesus' words were just taken literally; and his second advent, the resurrection, the fate of the wicked, etc. were not "spiritualized" into vague metaphors. The early Christian congregations accepted a literal, bodily resurrection of Christ. There was no need for details to be defined on the subject of the resurrection until the heretics came along and challenged the resurrection. Note this historical observation by Brown regarding early theology:
Opinions differ as to which early Christian writer deserves to be called the first theologian. A claim may be made for the converted philosopher Justin Martyr (ca. 100ca. 165), author of the celebrated First Apology, dealing with pagan arguments, and of the Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, dealing with Jewish ones. We shall choose the Greek-speaking Bishop of Lyons in southern Gaul, Irenaeus (ca. 125ca. 202), author of a five-volume work, Against Heresies, written about 18089. The full title is The Unmasking and Refutation of Falsely so-called Gnosis. Thus we see that one of the very earliest significant doctrinal works of Christianity was the direct result not of any desire to produce a comprehensive theology, but grew out of the necessity to deal with a dangerous and persistent heresy. (Heresies, p.42)
Thus there is a pattern: doctrine often must be clarified further to refute opposition.
Interestingly, the 27 books of the NT were canonized (accepted as inspired) by none other than the early church. In fact, all 27 books were not fully canonized until around 400 A.D., long after many of the significant writings of the early church fathers were also in their possession. We may almost say that the development of the body of doctrine preceded the arrival of the complete NT, for while the different books of the NT were written before or near the end of the first century and the Apostles' Creed dates from no earlier than 125, the first documentary evidence for the existence of a fairly complete NT canon, the Muratorian Fragment, dates from ca. 200, and the canonicity of some books of the NT remained controversial until into the fourth century, by which time many substantial doctrinal works had been written by the church fathers.
Therefore it may be said that while the Bible is inspired and complete for every good work, opponents of Christianity will seek to distort the language or context of its message, requiring clarification of its truths. Utmost care must be exercised, however, that in clarifying the truths, one does not change the actual message.
Refuting Jehovah's Witnesses
[In the following pages nine major interpretive errors of the Watchtower are discussed. Credit goes to James Sire for his outline of errors in Scripture Twisting.]
[1] WORLDVIEW CONFUSION
When we say "worldview," we are referring to the spectacles through which we look at life. In other words, we all look at life in a certain way. One of Russell's very first ideas was that Christ returned invisibly in 1874.1 By the late 20's, the date of this supposed event was changed to 1914.2 Using this notion as a foundation, everything he believed had to fit into the idea that Christ had already returned. So whenever he read anything in the Bible, his mind said, "We have to understand this in view of the fact that Christ has already returned." That's how a world view affects one's doctrine. It means seeing through a set of colored glasses; if you put on a set of yellow sunglasses, everything you see is going to be yellow. If you put on a set of "glasses" that says Christ already returned invisibly, everything you read in the Bible has to fit that, or you're going to change it, either consciously or subconsciously.
Originally, Russell and his followers believed that God had specially chosen Russell as his messenger, the "faithful and discreet slave." In the Society's early literature, they say that Russell was the chosen instrument used by God as the seventh and final messenger to the Christian church.
Russell believed there were only 144,000 members in the bride of Christ. He had a small group of followers (about 6,000), and they believed that most of the "anointed ones" (the bride of Christ) were chosen by the end of the first century. According to Russell, his followers were now in the last days, and there were a few left of this "class," probably around 6,000 to 9,000, which were the remaining members to be chosen for the bride of Christ. So, we find the organization reading the Bible through glasses that say only l44,000 are in the bride of Christ.
Can such an idea be supported by historical records?
Foxe's Book of Martyrs and Martyr's Mirror testifies that there were at least 250,000 Christians martyred for their faith in the early church! Since the number of those martyred for a cause is generally a small percentage of the total number involved in the cause, there had to have been much more than 144,000 true Christians back then. The Watchtower is implying that out of all those Christians, only a few, the "elite," were true Christians. Now, what puts them, living in the 20th century, in a position to say that? If 250,000 were ready to die for their faith and WERE put to death, how can the WT write them off as insincere or misled? This is simply an arbitrary assumption.
The follow-up doctrine to the "few anointed ones" is that there is a "great crowd" of "favorable ones" who do not really share with Christ, but will live on the earth under the supervision of the "earthly representatives" of Christ. Interestingly, the WT once taught that this "great crowd" was going to heaven, but that they weren't quite good enough to be a part of the bride of Christ. Because Rutherford later realized this to be unscriptural, he changed it. In 1935, he came out and said the "great crowd" was going to live on the earth. And because they weren't really born again, or "anointed," they wouldn't have the capability of understanding the Bible because they didn't have an anointing from God. So there were class distinctions from the very beginning of this organization.
The WT originally taught that the Bible was meant for Russell alone to interpret. A statement is made in the WT of Sept. 15, 1910 where Russell says, in effect, "If you read my books you'll find the truth of the Bible. If you've read my books, and then stop and just read the Bible itself (putting my books aside), you'll fall into darkness within two years." (Watchtower Reprints, p.298,299)
The WT changed their tune after the death of Russell and now say that the organization alone is qualified to interpret the Bible. In the Oct. 1, 1967 WT (p. 587) they say,
The Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe they can interpret the Bible. For this reason, the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah's visible organization in mind.
Today, the ORGANIZATION is the primary emphasis of their current teaching. The WT has always taught that Armageddon is "just around the corner," and accordingly they set the dates: 1914, 1918, 1925, 1941, and 1975 for it. Many JWs put their trust in 1975 and were sorely disappointed when nothing happened. The current teaching is that Armageddon will occur within the generation that began in 1914. "Updating" old prophecies presents no problem to them.
[2] INACCURATE OR INCOMPLETE QUOTATIONS
The WT exerts much effort to establish that certain passages in the Bible don't mean what they actually say. This becomes manifest in their treatment of Matt. 27:5153. When they quote from this passage, they leave out verse 53 and indicate its omission by using [ . . . ]. In fact, in their New World Translation, verse 53 is put in parenthesis, obviously for no other reason than that they don't want it there! Verse 53 says: "And persons coming out from the memorial tombs after his being raised up entered into the holy city." The WT has used the rest of the verses of this passage to try and prove that just the graves of the saints were thrown open and the decaying corpses were thrown upright, so that people from the city passing by could view them! It is obvious why they left out verse 53, because corpses would have difficulty walking into the city! This is done to support their denial of the concept of a bodily resurrection. When you read The Watchtower, keep an eye out for this familiar clue, [ . . . ]. It is obvious that not only are they guilty of incomplete or inaccurate quotation, but also twisted translation.
In the 10/15/75 WT we find an article in the "Questions From Readers" on Matt. 27:5153. The article says that "Scholars admit that the sense and proper translation is unusually difficult." Interestingly, one is hard-pressed to find a commentary which indicates that the translation is difficult. Perhaps believing it poses a difficulty for the WT, but even in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation that they use, the simple sense of the verse is clear. The 10/15/75 WT continues to say,
Without wresting the Greek grammar the translator can render Matt. 27:52,53 in a way that suggests that a similar exposing of corpses resulted from the earthquake occurring at Jesus' death. Thus, the translation by Johannes Greber renders these verses, "Tombs were laid open, many bodies of those buried there were tossed upright, and in this posture they projected from the graves and were seen by many who passed by the place on their way back to the city."
Now, that gives you an entirely different meaning, doesn't it? Such an interpretation can hardly be supported from the Greek! Yet the Governing Body agrees with Johannes Greber, a confirmed spiritist who wrote his own bible with the aid of the "spirit world."
The WT was well aware of Greber's connection with the spirit world and even published this information as far back as 1956, yet continued to quote from his bible in order to support their doctrinal positions as late as 1983. It is plain to see that they HAVE wrested the Greek grammar totally out of its context and wording.
[3] IGNORING THE CONTEXT
As mentioned earlier, Col. 1:15 calls Christ the "firstborn (Greek: prototokos) of all creation." Greek dictionaries will tell you that prototokos has two definitions: (1) the first one born in a family, or (2) it is used to express priority and authority. In all five cases in the New Testament where this word is used in reference to Christ, it carries the second meaning. In many cases in the Old Testament (in the Greek Septuagint), it also carries the second meaning, as when Ephraim is called the firstborn, though Manasseh was actually the first one born. How do we know which definition of "firstborn" to use in Col. 1:15? Let's examine the context.
We must ask, is this passage discussing Christ's creation, or is it discussing Christ as Creator (the head over all things)? Col. 1:15 says about Christ, that "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation, for by Him all things were created." Paul is making it plain that because Christ created all things, he is therefore the firstborn (head) over all things in heaven and earth. So the WT has intentionally ignored the context of this passage; and the word [other] is added to support their point.
[4] COLLAPSING CONTEXTS
This means taking two different and unrelated contexts in the Bible and combining them into a doctrine that doesn't really have anything to do with either context.
The WT has done this in its treatment of Rev. 7:9, where it says, "Look! I saw a great crowd which no man was able to number, out of all tribes. . . ." The WT interprets this "great crowd" as being unregenerate people that are not truly "anointed" ones (though they are standing in the very presence of God in white robes, symbolizing their righteousness!). Then they take a statement in John 10:16, where Jesus says, "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold, these too I must bring, and they will become one flock with one shepherd," and try to fit it together with the "great crowd" of Rev. 7:9. While to any serious Bible student John 10:16 obviously applies to the Gentiles (who were not yet introduced to Christ), the WT world view of two classes of Christians causes them to combine these two unrelated passages in an endeavor to support their doctrine.
[5] SELECTIVE CITING
In this case, certain passages in the Bible are used to prove a point, and other passages are ignored that might lead to a somewhat different conclusion. This is exemplified in the WT's explanation of the Hebrew word, sheol (the place of the dead). While calling attention to the verses that indicate inactivity in sheol, they ignore references to sheol that would lead one to an entirely different conclusion. They are silent about several passages where sheol represents a place of conscious existence for those who have died. Why would they leave these out? In order to fit their preconceived world view, which says that there is no existence beyond the grave.
[6] CONFUSED DEFINITION
In this case, different definitions are given for Biblical words or concepts than are commonly understood. If we use English as our common language, it behooves us to use it properly and not to "make up" new definitions to support our particular world view. For instance, while the word death can mean annihilation in the English language under certain situations, it is not used at all in the Bible in this sense. It is always used to signify either spiritual death or bodily corruption; or both. The word torment is taken from the Greek basanizo, which means to torture. So when the Bible uses this word in Rev. 14:10 and Rev. 20:10 to refer to individuals who are tormented forever and ever, it is dishonest for the WT to try and interpret this as something other than physical or spiritual punishment of a conscious being, regardless of how uncomfortable they may find this concept. To say (as they do) the never-ending torment of Rev. 20:10 means the wicked will leave us with "bad memories" (since the wicked will supposedly be annihilated) is a confused definition.
Another word severely misused by the WT is the word body, translated from the Greek soma. According to Webster's Dictionary, body is used with reference to having a material, as opposed to spiritual, nature. A body has to have some kind of material substance, either known or unknown. Even the Greek dictionaries do not allow for a definition other than material substance for this word.
[7] OBVIOUS FALLACY
Something is presented as "obviously" factual, even though it is not. In their book, United In Worship (p. 71) the WT says,
Those who adhere to traditional religions, both inside Christendom and outside, think they have an immortal soul, which would make resurrection unnecessary.
This is an assumption which is based on a misunderstanding of Christian doctrine regarding the resurrection. They continue,
Any who try to reconcile these two concepts find it more confusing than hope-inspiring.
This is assumption number two, that Christians are confused by their own doctrine.
[8] SUPPLEMENTING BIBLICAL AUTHORITY
The WT teaches that man needs something other than the Bible to come to a knowledge of truth. In the Jan. 15, 1983 WT, referring to those who question the authority of the organization they say:
If we get to thinking that we know better than the organization, we should ask ourselves, "Where did we learn Bible truth in the first place? Would we know the way of the truth if it had not been for the guidance of the organization? Really, can we get along without the direction of God's organization? No, we cannot." (p.27)
They are saying that a person would not know the truth if it had not been for them; they are the only source of truth. What they are really saying is that anyone, anywhere in the world who picks up the Bible can never hope to have the truth until they find the WT organization.
[9] IGNORING THE HISTORICAL RECORD
The WT likes to quote from historical authorities in order to support their world view; and yet, most often the historian that they quote from does not agree with their distorted concepts at all. Or, they may quote historians partially, just enough to make an isolated point. A case in point is in the Sept. 15, 1983 WT, where they quote from Paul Johnson, who wrote A History of Christianity. In his book, Mr. Johnson makes the statement that "Christianity began in confusion. . . ." In its stated form, this was unacceptable for quoting due to its contradicting the WT's view (that the early Christians were highly organized). So what do they do? They add a word in brackets, and now the WT's quote of Paul Johnson reads, "[Apostate] Christianity began in confusion. . . ." So they have turned the meaning around 180 degrees from what Mr. Johnson intended to say, and they weren't even honest enough to let you know that they were misquoting him!
Interestingly enough, there are no historical records to verify that the early Christian congregations were anything like the modern-day Kingdom Halls of Jehovah's Witnesses. The early congregations were almost identical to the churches we see today, in respect to their lack of unity and internal problems!
Actually, Paul Johnson does make some very enlightening statements that the WT will not quote, for they do not fit into their world view. Remember, they get selective. Paul Johnson says,
The Followers of Jesus were divided right from the start on elements of faith and practice; and the further the missionaries moved from the base, the more likely it was that their teachings would diverge. Controlling them implied an ecclesiastical organization. In Jerusalem, there were leaders and pillars, vaguely-defined officials modeled on Jewish practice; but they were ineffective. The Jerusalem council was a failure it outlined a consensus but could not make it work in practice. Paul could not be controlled, nor presumably could others. Nor could the pillars of this inner party maintain their authority even in Jerusalem. They slipped back into Judaism. Then came the catastrophe of 66-70 A.D. and the central organization of the church, as it was, disappeared. The atmosphere of the early church, in short, was that of a loosely organized revivalist movement. (ibid., p. 44)
That's how Mr. Johnson defines the early church; considerably different than the goose-stepping WT organization. The historical records reveal that the early churches were just as divisive as the churches today, yet holding on to a basic view of Christ, God and the Holy Spirit, as well as the incarnation and bodily resurrection of Christ.
In summary, a most effective technique to cause the JW to reexamine what he has been taught is to ask him how the Governing Body interprets the Bible. Since they do not tell their followers what procedure they use, the JW will be at a loss to comment. He can then be shown the proper technique of interpretation, and will be in a position to compare the two methods. He will find one to be arbitrary, the other logical and consistent.
1 Russell borrowed his doctrine of the "invisible return" from the Adventists, whose founder William Miller had predicted the return of Christ for 1843. When he didn't come as predicted, Miller's followers concluded that, since the date "must be" correct, his return would be invisible. Russell customized this view by changing the date to 1874.
2 World events were used as "proof" that 1874 was Christ's return. The events that began in 1914, however, provided even greater "proof" than 1874, so the 1874 date was rejected by J.F. Rutherford. This gave the WT more time as well, since 1914 was originally supposed to be the end of the world!
65
144,000 resurrected BEFORE Jesus rose?
by tula in
1. watchtower
2. bible
according to matthew 27:52-53.

(this occurred during the time when jesus was being crucified).

"and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.".
writetoknow
In spite of my view that skeptical objections to miracles are largely without foundation, I have struggled lately with Matthew 27:52-53. I can understand and sympathize with non-believers like XXXXX who consider this passage to be blatantly unbelievable. Unlike Jesus' miracles, which are organically related to his ministry, this story seems "stuck on" and apparently is so bizarre that Harper's Bible Commentary actually advises us to ignore it. If a passage such as this appeared in another claimed revelation I doubt that Christians would take it as anything but a very tall tale. I'd appreciate any ideas on how to deal with this passage when I'm trying to get a doubter to accept the reasonableness of the Christian position on New Testament miracles.
...................................................................................
ZZZ, thanks for your question and your interest in sharing the message of our Wondrous One...
Matthew is written to the Jew (generally) so we should look there first for some clue as to what is going on...
Once we start looking around for clues in the Jewish background, a strange situation develops-the passage creates the opposite problem for us! In other words, the passage will seem to be so tightly-woven into Matthew's portrayal of the Messiah that we might have to ask why Mark and Luke didn't mention it!
Let's first make some notes about the passage...
And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. 52 The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
A few quick notes about what we DO know:
1. Jesus dies with a loud cry.
2. The veil of the Temple of torn in two from top to bottom.
3. There was an earthquake of some sort (common for that area).
4. The rocks split (a more severe earthquake)
5. Bodies of many (but not all) Jewish saints came back to life (of some type-natural or supernatural)
6. They come out of the tombs in which they had been buried.
7. They went into the "holy city" (undoubtedly Jerusalem)
8. They became visible to many people (but not all).
9. The events above concerning the raising/appearing of the saints occurred AFTER the resurrection (most probable punctuation/division of the verse-see standard commentaries).
And a few notes about what we DO NOT know:
1. How many were raised.
2. Whether they were in natural-but-mortal bodies (e.g. Lazarus), natural-but-immortal bodies (e.g. post-resurrection, pre-ascension Jesus), or supernatural/glorified bodies (e.g. post-ascension Jesus in Revelation).
3. How long they remained on earth (till Jesus ascended? Until they died?).
4. Whether they only appeared to believing Jews (cf. Acts 10.40-41) or anyone.
5. Why ALL the saints were not raised?
(Matthew is not particularly interested in satisfying our curiosity-instead, as we shall see, he is trying to confront us with the awesomeness of Christ's work!)
So, let's look at this passage from a few different data-points:
1. First of all, in a major section of Jewish thought of the day (i.e. the rabbinical strains that later became Mishnaic Judiasm) the bodily resurrection of OT Jewish saints would occur when messiah came. They literally expected a bodily resurrection (like that in the passage under discussion) to occur at the revealing of the messiah...
  Indeed, one rabbi was recorded as saying this:
  "R. Jeremiah commanded, 'When you bury me, put shoes on my feet, and give me a staff in my hand, and lay me on one side; that when Messias comes I may be ready." (cited in Lightfoot, _ Commentary of the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica , in.loc.)
  Much of such rabbinical lore had an element of truth in it; and this was no exception...the Messiah DID produce SOME resurrections of SOME the saints--but only as a first-fruits of His work...
  So, in keeping with Matthew's Jewish-oriented message, it makes sense for him to record this action of the Messiah.
2. This event actually DOES mesh 'organically' with the general topics in NT teachings: Jesus teaching about resurrection to Mary in John; the Christ as firstfruits in Paul; and Christ leading 'captivity captive' (OT saints in Sheol released at the TRUE atonement)...
3. These types of resurrection people (probably in normal form, like Lazarus was raised) form the basis for one argument of the first apologists of the faith, Quadratus. He was an very early 2nd century apologist (writing sometime during the reign of Hadrian, 117-138ad), and we have only one fragment of his (cited from GASC:36):
  "But our Savior's works were permanent, for they were real. Those who had been cured or rose from the dead not only appeared to be cured or raised but were permanent, not only during our Savior's stay on earth, but also after his departure. They remained for a considerable period, so that some of them even reached our times."
  Now it would be highly unusual for someone raised in 33 ad to live naturally another 90-100 years (to the times of Quadratus' writings) but this is not necessarily the scope of his reference to 'our times'...this latter phrase could often mean plus-or-minus 50-75 years, allowing SOME of these saints to die naturally again (as would have the resurrected Lazarus, the widow's son, etc.) after a few decades.
  The point is that resurrections are not isolated phenomena--they were a bit more widespread than the few individual cases mentioned in the gospels would lead us to believe...Eutychus by Paul, the group at the Crucifixion--indeed, even Ireneaus--a half century later--could write of resurrections in Christian Churches (A.H. 2.32.4)...
  Indeed, stories and legends of these risen saints circulated and were embellished over time. They show up in several of the NT apocryphal works (e.g. The Greek Apocalypse of Ezra 7.1-2, Gospel of Nicodemus 17ff). For example, in this later work (Gospel of Nicodemus/Acts of Pilate), there is the story of Simeon and his sons (living in Arimathea), who were raised at that time, whose tombs were still open (for inspection!), and who wrote sworn testimony to their resurrection. While many of these stories are no doubt fanciful embellishments of the passage in Matthew (apocryphal writings generally "filled in the gaps" left by the biblical writers), there may be some historical core behind such related stories as this one about Simeon.
4. Paul's argument in Col 2.15:" And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross." MIGHT find a reference to this 'public' display of the resurrection power of Jesus.
5. Its tight coupling in the narrative with the torn veil, suggests that it too is part of the dramatic display of God's 'change of program' for His people...no longer is access to God 'covered with a veil' and no longer are His saints covered with 'the veil of death'...
6. It is this last point that tips us off to what Matthew is likely demonstrating/pointing out in this passage: that the rising/appearing of the saints is INTIMATELY CONNECTED with both the literary texture of the passage AND with the ministry of the Jewish Messiah...
  The connection with the preceding image (i.e. the earthquake and rocks) shows up in the Jewish connection between the two in the thought of the day. So Raymond Brown, in his 1,600 page magisterial work on the Death of the Messiah, gives us the archeological background in DM:1123-1124:
  The connection of the tomb openings with the preceding rending of the rocks is splendidly visible in the Dura Europos synagogue wall-paintings that portray the raising of the dead as part of the enlivening of the dry bones in Ezek 37--a 3d-cent. AD tableau that is very helpful in understanding how Matt and/or his readers might imagine the scene he is narrating. There in the splitting of a mountain covered by trees (almost surely the Mount of Olives rent by an earthquake), rocks are rent, thus opening up tombs burrowed into the sides of the mountain and exposing bodies of the dead and their parts. A figure is depicted who may be the Davidic Messiah (see Ezek 37:24-25) bringing about this raising of the dead. Earlier and contemporary with the writing of Matt there is testimony to the importance that Ezek 37 had for the just who died for their convictions about God. At Masada, where Jewish Zealots made their last stand against the Roman armies in AD 73, in the floor of the synagogue were found fragments of a scroll on which was written Ezekiel's account of his vision of the raising of the dead bones. Consequently, even apart from the Dura Europos picturization, Ezek 37:12-13 may be the key passage behind Matt's description both in this line and in what follows, for it offers the only opening of tombs (as distinct from the simple raising of the dead) described in the OT. The people of God are assured that they will come to know the Lord because: "I will open your tombs [mnema], and I will bring you up out of your tombs, and I will lead you into the land of Israel."
  Its connection with the messianic ministry of Jesus (of primary concern to Matthew) is also seen:
  The coming of the kingdom of God in the ministry of Jesus was understood not as the final manifestation of the kingdom (i.e., the culmination when the Son of Man would gather before him all the nations, assigning those who are to inherit the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world, as in 25:31-34) but as an inbreaking inaugurating and anticipating it. Similarly, this raising of "many bodies" as Jesus dies is not the universal final resurrection but an inbreaking of God's power signifying that the last times have begun and the judgment has been inaugurated. [DM:1126]
  And finally, its connection with the presentation motif of Matthew (i.e. relating the events surrounding the life and ministry of Jesus to its OT background) is seen through the explicit Ezekiel imagery:
  Matt's second motive in adding v. 53 was the fulfillment of Scripture. Above I pointed out how much Ezek 37 with its creative description of the enlivening of the dry bones influenced Jewish imagination in picturing the resurrection of the dead. The first part of Ezek 37:12-13, "I will open your tombs," probably shaped the third line of the quatrain of Matt 27:51b-52b, "And the tombs were opened." But the Ezek passage continues: "And I will bring you up out of your tombs, and I will lead you into the land of Israel. Then you shall know that I am the Lord." Even as elsewhere Matt enhances the scriptural background and flavoring of material taken from Mark, so here scripturally he goes beyond the quatrain by offering in 27:53 the fulfillment of the rest of the Ezek passage: "And having come out from the tombs, . . . they entered into the holy city [of Jerusalem]." Another biblical passage may have shaped Matt's addition, especially the last clause "and they were made visible to many," i.e., Isa 26:19 (LXX): "Those in the tombs shall be raised, and those in the land [or on the earth] shall rejoice." Thus in what he has added to Mark (both the quatrain taken over from popular tradition and his own commentary on it), Matt has developed the theological insight. In apocalyptic language and imagery borrowed from Scripture he teaches that the death of Jesus and his resurrection ("raising") marked the beginning of the last times and of God's judgment...[DM:1140]
  Thus the passage finds connection with (1) the Jewish milieu, (2) the messianic mission of Jesus, and (3) the OT prophetic writings about the Messiah. Far from being simply 'stuck on', it is very much a part of the Jewish context in which Jesus ministered and in which Matthew wrote.
Overall the passage makes the theological connections clear for the reader. Brown summarizes this well, noting that this small passage...
...offered a dramatic way in which ordinary people familiar with OT thought could understand that the death of Jesus on the cross had introduced the day of the Lord with all its aspects, negative (divine wrath, judgment) and positive (conquest of death, resurrection to eternal life).' [DM:1137]
[Also, from this analysis, it should be quite clear as to why it did not show up in Luke-writing to the Gentiles, and in Mark-an abbreviated version of Peter's core preaching (written down by a Hellenistic Jew). It would not have been relevant to their literary purposes.]
In this small section, we see also a microcosm of the future: judgment will come (and we will be held accountable-each of us) and yet God has graciously made a 'way of escape,' created by the awesome death of the Messiah Jesus (for you, for me, and for your friend...)
Hope this helps,
glenn miller, 4/7/97
The Christian ThinkTank...[http://www.Christian-thinktank.com] (Reference Abbreviations)
65
144,000 resurrected BEFORE Jesus rose?
by tula in
1. watchtower
2. bible
according to matthew 27:52-53.

(this occurred during the time when jesus was being crucified).

"and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.".
writetoknow

The Watchtower Society and Johannes Greber
Ken Raines
During the 1960s and 1970s, the Watchtower Society occasionally used the translation of the New Testament by Johannes Greber to support their similar renderings of John 1:1 and Matthew 27:52,53. In 1983 they officially stopped using his translation because of its "close rapport with spiritism." The information that Geber Was a Spiritist Was readily available to the Society's writers. In 1955 and 1956 the Society's writers themselves wrote of Greber's spiritism. Their use of Greber's translation to support their New World Translation and their explanations for it is evidence of shallow scholarship.
Johannes Greber was a Catholic priest turned spiritist who translated the New Testament "with the help of God's spirits." His experiences with spirits and their communications with him are related in his book, Communication With the Spirit World published in 1932. (See previous article)
Greber's translation reads similarly to the New World Translation at Jn. 1:1 and Matt. 27:52,53. The Society quoted and referred to it in support of their controversial renderings of these verses in material they published from 1961 to 1976.
The Society Quotes Greber
The Society's much disputed translation of Jn. 1:1 is "the Word was a god" in clause c. Since this translation is usually considered "tendentious" or even impossible by recognized scholars, the Society has sought support for this rendering in lesser known, and in some cases, obscure sources. They have, for example, quoted Johannes Greber's and John S. Thompson's translation that render it in the same manner. Both individuals apparently received this translation from spirits. [1]
The Society quoted Greber's translation of Jn. 1:1 as if he was a noteworthy Greek scholar or authority in their publications The Word--Who Is He According to John, 1962, p. 5; The Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1962, p. 554; Make Sure of all Things, 1965, p. 489, and Aid to Bible Understanding, 1971, p. 1669.
Greber's New Testament translation was also used by the Society in support of their unusual translation of Matt. 27:52,53. These verses describe an apparent resurrection at the time of Jesus' death. Most translations render these verses much like the NIV which has:
The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
The early church Father Ignatious apparently referred to a resurrection of some Old Testament "holy people" at the time of Jesus' death and resurrection that were seen in Jerusalem. [2] However, only Matthew's gospel records such an event in the Bible and the grammar of the Greek text here is somewhat ambiguous. Both the Society's and Greber's translations of these verses state that instead of a resurrection (neither believe in a bodily resurrection) there was simply a projection of dead bodies out of their graves as a result of the earthquake that accompanied Jesus' death and these dead bodies were thereafter seen by others who passed by on their way into Jerusalem.
They quoted Greber's translation of these verses to support their similar translation in The Watchtower, Jan. 1, 1961, p. 30; Aid to Bible Understanding, 1971, p. 1134; The Watchtower, Oct. 15, 1975, p. 640, and The Watchtower, April 15, 1976, p. 231.
Greber a Spiritist
The Society however, in 1955 and 1956 wrote material that used Greber's translation and book as an example of spiritism. This appeared in the booklet, What do the Scriptures Say About "Survival After Death?" where they said:
It comes as no surprise that one Johannes Greber, a former Catholic clergyman, has become a spiritualist and has published the book entitled "Communication With the Spirit World, Its Laws and Its Purpose." (1932, Macoy Publishing Company, New York) In its Foreword he makes the typical misstatement: "The most significant spiritualistic book is the Bible... [3]
Also the February 15, 1956, Watchtower made these famous statements:
Says Johannes Greber in the introduction of his translation of The New Testament, copyrighted in 1937: "I myself was a Catholic priest, and... never as much believed in the possibility of communicating with the world of God's spirits. The day came, however, when I involuntarily took my first step toward such communication,.... My experiences are related in a book that has appeared in both German and English and bears the title, Communication with the Spirit-World: Its Laws and Its Purpose." (Page 15, ¶ 2, 3).... Greber endeavors to make his New Testament read very spiritualistic.... ex-priest Greber believes [spirits] helped him in his translation. [4]
From these quotations it is apparent that the information that Greber was a spiritist and that he "translated" the New Testament with the help of spirits was readily available to the Society's writers and was known by at least one of the Society's writers in 1955 and 1956. This is only five years before they began quoting Greber favorably.
Letter to the Greber Foundation
The Johannes Greber Memorial Foundation republished Greber's New Testament translation and Communication book in 1980.[5] Apparently aware of the Society quoting approvingly of his translation they sent a copy of the 1980 ed. of the translation as well as a copy of Greber's Communication With the Spirit World of God book to the Society's headquarters in Brooklyn, N.Y.. In response, the person occupying desk "EG:ESF" in the Society's correspondence department responded with a thank you letter dated December 20, 1980. This letter said:
JOHANNES GREBER MEMORIAL FOUNDATION
139 Hillside Ave.
Teaneck, NJ 07666
Gentlemen:
This is to acknowledge receipt of the two books you recently sent to us, The New Testament translated by Johannes Greber, and his book "Communication With the Spirit World of God."
We appreciate you sending these volumes on to us. For some years we have been aware of the translation by Johannes Greber and have on occasion even quoted it. Copies of the translation, though, have been hard to obtain. Since we have four libraries... we wonder about the possibility of obtaining a few additional copies of The New Testament.[ 6]
Here the writer at the headquarters asks for more copies of the translation but not of the Communication book. "EG" knows that they have been quoting from it "on occasion" and have been aware of it for "some time".
The Society Responds to Questions
Before and after the above letter from the Society was sent to the Greber Foundation, numerous individuals wrote the Society about the translation. For example, Keith Morse of Personal Freedom Outreach (PFO) wrote the Society one year after the above letter was sent to the Greber Foundation. He asked about the translation and was told in a response by the Society:
With reference to your inquiry regarding the publication the New Testament, by Johannes Greber, we have to inform you that we do not publish or stock this book. In line with your comments, on the title page of our library copy of this book, against the date 1937, the publishers are given as John Felsburg, Inc., 88 N. Fourth Ave., New York, NY. This is really the only information that we have,... [7]
Here, one year after receiving a copy of the 1980 edition of his New Testament translation and asking for additional copies for their other libraries, the Watchtower correspondent, desk "EW:ESG", says the only information they have is the address of their library copy (not 'copies') which was the 1937 John Felsburg edition. What happened to the other copies? Did they throw them away because of their spiritistic origin or were they in different libraries which the correspondence desk didn't check? Others who wrote asking about the Greber New Testament and an address of where to obtain a copy got the same answer. [8]
This prompted M. Kurt Goedelman of PFO to write the Society about this. In his letter dated September 27, 1982, he gave the Society some of the references in their literature to Greber as scholarly support of their translation and then said:
The reason I am directing this letter to you is to receive a response to why you use Greber's work to support your theology? This may seem like a peculiar question, however when one checks into the source of Mr. Greber's work, we find he is a spirit medium. The fact that he is a medium is not hidden from public knowledge, but rather is the very heart of the Greber message.
I have enclosed a photocopy of a flyer furnished by the Johannes Greber Memorial Foundation which explains briefly his mediumship. Also this flyer gives insight into how Greber allegedly made his 'New Testament' translation. I have marked this flyer as "Figure #1" for your convenience.
In addition to Greber's 'New Testament' he has written a book entitled Communication With the Spirit World of God, .... I know that the Watchtower Society is aware of this publication as they have purchased a copy of this very work from the Greber Memorial Foundation. This is proven by the enclosed photocopied Watchtower letter (marked "Figure #2"), which has also been provided by the Greber Foundation.
Thus I restate my question as to why the writers of Watchtower material are in use of a double standard. That is, numerous Watchtower publications roll off your presses instructing members to have nothing to do with spiritistic works, then they themselves quote from spiritistic material to endorse the theology of Jehovah's Witnesses....
Also in closing I would very much appreciate your comments concerning the enclosed photocopied Watchtower letter to Mr. Keith Morse (marked "Figure #4"). The Society informed Mr. Morse that they do not know where to obtain a Greber 'New Testament' translation and only furnished him with an out-of-date address. Take careful note of the date of the letter to Mr. Morse (December 10, 1981) and then note the date of the letter to the Greber Foundation (December 20, 1980). This proves that the Society did have an up-to-date address, but provided bogus information to Mr. Morse's inquiry.
I ask that you please not pass my letter over or discard it before a reply is sent. I will be anxiously awaiting your prompt response.
Sincerely,
M. Kurt Goedelman,
Director [9]
Needless to say, they never sent him a reply. Counter-cult groups like PFO published material on the Society's use of Greber and what they considered the "bogus" information and cover-up of their knowledge of Greber. This information eventually reached JWs themselves. For example, Marilyn Zweiful wrote a letter to the Society dated December 21, 1982, after a friend of hers was asked about the Greber situation by her son-in-law who had heard a recorded message tape ('A message for JWS') that discussed this subject. It discussed the Society's use of Greber, his spiritism as explained by the Society itself in the 1956 Watchtower article and their recent correspondence with the Greber Foundation. She stated that she didn't know how to explain this contradictory information to her "confused" friends and asked for the Society's help. In reply, the Society wrote a letter dated March 15, 1983(desk ER:ESZ). This letter to me is revealing. In it they stated:
No doubt you have had opportunity to read the comments in our letter dated December 31, 1982, to Brother Jack Gottfried, secretary of your congregation. In our letter we addressed the issue of the propriety of the Society in quoting Johannes Greber's translation as an example of another translation that agreed with the New World Translation. It was stated that it was not our concern to go into the background or religious convictions of each translator. Who really can say if Mr. Greber was under the influence of the demons when translating a particular verse or portion of his translation? If he was under demon influence in translating John 1:1, then it is not beyond the Devil or the demons to tell the truth on occasions, if doing so will advance their evil ends in some way, such as giving opposers some excuse for claiming that the translation published by Jehovah's Witnesses must not be correct because it happens to translate John 1:1 in a manner similar to the way the translation in question does....
You also mention in your letter a tape recording which mentions a "thank you" letter to the Greber Foundation from the Society.... Our having this Bible translation in our library by no means indicated that we agreed with everything in it. We have a large number of books written by a wide range of religions. We keep these simply for reference.
I do not want to analyze this response to death, but it is interesting to me for a number of reasons. They said it was not their "concern" to go into the background of the translators they quote in support of their translation. This is simply shoddy scholarship. Also, in saying that it is not beyond the Devil or the demons to tell the truth about how John 1:1 is to be translated if it will further their cause "such as giving opposers some excuse" for claiming the JW's translation must be incorrect or suspect is incredibly paranoid and myopic.
Think about it. Greber's translation was printed in 1937, thirteen years before the Society released its New Testament translation in 1950. Demons had Greber translate John 1:1 correctly, unlike most translations, as "the Word was a god", simply so opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses starting thirteen years later would have an "excuse" for calling into question such a translation! A JW could argue that the Society believed in the "a god" translation years before Greber's translation, so the demons were trying to discredit the JW interpretation by giving the "correct" translation to a spiritist like Greber! This is simply myopic in the extreme. What about John S. Thompson's similar translation from 1829 when he was influenced by spirits? This is well before JWs were around. Did the demons influence Thompson to translate it as the "Logos was a god" just so opposers of JWs would have an "excuse" to call into question the Society's translation over one hundred years later?
Questions from Readers
As a result of these numerous letters, the Society formally ended their use of Greber's New Testament in 1983. In the April 1, 1983 Watchtower they printed the following:
Why, in recent years, has The Watchtower not made use of the translation by the former Catholic priest, Johannes Greber?
This translation was used occasionally in support of renderings of Matthew 27:52, 53 and John 1:1, as given in the New World Translation and other authoritative Bible versions. But as indicated in a foreword to the 1980 edition of The New Testament by Johannes Greber, this translator relied on "God's Spirit World" to clarify for him how he should translate difficult passages. It is stated: "His wife, a medium of God's Spiritworld was often instrumental in conveying the correct answers from God's Messengers to Pastor Greber." The Watchtower has deemed it improper to make use of a translation that has such a close rapport with spiritism. (Deuteronomy 18:10-12) The scholarship that forms the basis for the rendering of the above-cited texts in the New World Translation is sound and for this reason does not depend at all on Greber's translation for authority. Nothing is lost, therefore, by ceasing to use his New Testament. [10]
This "official" statement by the Society contains several problems. First, by saying "But as indicated in a foreword to the 1980 edition" to his New Testament he relied on spirits in the "translation" process, they are implying that the 1937 edition they had and used before did not contain this information or that they were not aware of it. This is further born out by the later statement that they have "deemed it improper to make use of a translation that has such a close rapport with spiritism". If they did know during the 1960s and 1970s that he was a spiritist, then they wouldn't have used it in the first place. That appears to be the implication.
However, the 1937 edition's introduction said the same as the 1980 edition. This can be demonstrated by the Society's quoting from it in the 1956 Watchtower quoted above. They quoted the introduction as well as his Communication With the Spirit World book to show he was a spiritist. The Society appears to be saying in this 1983 article that they had just found out that Greber was a spiritist based on the introduction of the 1980 edition. This was directly stated by the Australian branch of the Watchtower. John Pye wrote a letter to the Australian branch shortly after this Questions from Readers item appeared. Going by the name of John Richards for the sake of privacy he asked them in a letter dated June 3, 1983, when they first found out about Greber's spiritism. They replied with a letter dated June 14, 1983. The respondent was desk "SA:SP" who said:
We are replying to your letter of June 3, 1983, in which you inquired as to the time the Watchtower first discovered that Johannes Greber relied on the spirit world to clarify for him how he should translate difficult passages. As soon as we found out that he had connections with spiritism, we ceased using his translation as an authority and openly made this known in the April 1, 1983 issue of the Watchtower. Some may wish to impute wrong motive in regard to our original use of this translation, but please be assured we take an honest approach to our study of God's Word. Jehovah's Witnesses have always been opposed to any form of spiritism....
The rendering of John 1:1 in the New World Translation is no way dependent on the translation by Johannes Greber. It is based on good scholarship and a sincere desire to render the text according to the original Greek used by the writer. If individuals or other organizations wish to analyze our motives and present these in a critical and negative manner, we leave that to them. We stand before our God with a clear conscience as we promote true worship...
Here the branch correspondent, going by the April 1, 1983, Watchtower claimed that as soon as they found out about his spiritism they stopped using his translation. This is not true. They knew he was a spiritist in 1955 and 1956! By "they" and "the Society", I mean Watchtower Society writers. Is it possible they all forgot about Greber's spiritism? Did the author(s) of the 1955 and 1956 material die or forget five years later who Greber was? This could be possible. This writer asked Ray Franz, one of the compilers of the Society's Bible Encyclopedia Aid to Bible Understanding which quoted Greber twice, if he was responsible for either of those two references and if he knew who Greber was. He replied:
On the Aid material, all articles were always read by and, if considered necessary, edited by at least one other person on the project staff. So I am certain to have at least reviewed the writeups of the two articles you list. And I am equally certain that in doing so the thought of Greber's being connected with spiritism never entered my mind. I was doing circuit and district work in the Caribbean at the time the October 1, 1955 and February 15, 1956, articles came out with their information on Greber. I read them of course, but in the years that followed between then and the start of the Aid project in 1966, I also read thousands of articles in the 240 other Watchtowers and the 240 Awakes published during those ten years, plus many other publications. I would no more remember his name than I would remember the name of Doctor Rumble or Jean Brierre, mentioned on the same page with him in the 1955 magazine, or Bishop Samuel Fallows, mentioned on the same page with him in the 1956 issue. Had I remembered the brief mention of him in the 1955 and 1956 articles I am sure it would have caused me to express concern over the use of his translation. It was not until after leaving the Brooklyn headquarters that the issue of the propriety of quoting from Greber's translation ever came to my attention. What is true of me is, I believe, true of the others working on the Aid project.... I believe most of the staff members I knew would have conscientious qualms about quoting anything connected with spiritism, other than in discussing the wrongful aspects of spiritism... [11]
I believe these statements are true. Most people would forget a mention of an individual in an article years later. However, it doesn't address the question of why the society's authors quoted his translation in the first place. This to me indicates the shoddy nature of Watchtower scholarship and research.
Watchtower Scholarship
Why did they quote him if they didn't know who it was they were quoting? It seems to me in reading thousands of pages of their literature, that the writers do not do much serious research. Nor do they present their material in a scholarly or scholastically sound manner. It is hard to escape the impression that what they do many times is simply look for evidence that supports the Society's position and present that without fairly analyzing the evidence or presenting competing views in addition to their own.
This appears to be the case with their quoting Greber and their material on John 1:1 in general. A writer probably simply went to the Bethel library and quoted a few things (including Greber's translation) that they could use and didn't do much if any research on who they quoted and why they held their position. This seems to be indicated by the response to Marilyn Zweiful's letter to the Society. The response she got as quoted above was that it was not their habit of going into the "background and religious convictions" of the translators they quote. Given this, it is easy to see why something like this could happen. Since this shortcoming apparently hasn't been corrected, it is easy to see why this still happens, such as their quoting John S. Thompson's translation.
I will make an even harder statement about Watchtower Society material. I can't think of anything they have produced that evidences serious, sound scholarship and research on their part. This is true of all subjects, not just translation questions such as John 1:1. A few JWs and ex-JWs have tried to defend the Society on some of this, but unsuccessfully in my judgment. [12] As Jerry Bergman in a letter to the author stated:
... the Watchtower's historical archives provide a seemingly inexhaustible pool of craziness, superficially written articles, and naive acceptance of in vogue ideas. One would think that a person who was Biblically oriented would have stayed closer to the wealth of scholarship that had been completed up to that time.... Much of the Society's problem is their incredibly superficial research, and the fact that the attitude of "God directs us" tends to cause one to be lazy--why work hard if God directs your ways, for God will insure that only what is true will be published... [13]
References and notes
1. See the articles, "The American Quarterly Review and John S. Thompson" and "Johannes Greber" in this issue.
2. Ignatious, Magnesians, chapter ix; Trallions, chapter ix.
3. What do the Scriptures Say About "Survival After Death?", 1955, p. 88. These comments were repeated in The Watchtower, October 1, 1955, p. 603, ¶33.
4. The Watchtower, February 15, 1956, pp. 110, 111.
5. The Communication book was retitled Communication With the Spirit World of God with the 1980 edition.
6. For a photo copy of this letter see: Cetnar, William, Questions For Jehovah's Witnesses, p. 53 (hereafter Questions); Magnani, Duane and Barrett, Arthur, Dialogue with Jehovah's Witnesses, Vol. 1(Clayton CA.: Witness, Inc.), 1983, p. 62. (Hereafter Dialogue.)
7. Letter from the Watchtower Society to Keith Morse, December 10, 1981. For a photo copy of this letter see, Dialogue, vol. 1, p. 61; Questions, p. 53.
8. See Waters, Randall, Thus Saith the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, 1982, 1987, pp. 56-59.
9. Letter from M. Kurt Goedelman to Watchtower Society, September 27, 1982, pp. 1, 2.
10. The Watchtower, April 1, 1983, p. 31.
11. Letter from Raymond Franz to author, March 8, 1993. Ray in the letter also stated [page 2]: "That does not mean that the handling of inquiries by the Watch Tower's offices is consistently straightforward, for it obviously is often not. The 1983 letter and also the Questions from Readers... clearly exemplify a degree of deviousness. The inquiries sent in plainly set out the facts so that the writer of the reply would not be dependent on a photographic memory to see the connection."
12. Herle, Nelson, The Trinity Doctrine Examined in the Light of History and the Bible, 1983; Penton, M. James, Apocalypse Delayed, 1985, pp. 174-5. Penton also says on pages 196 and 197 that the Society's writings on evolution such as Did Man Get Here by Evolution or Creation? from 1967 "are among the best published by the Watch Tower Society" as they relied on JWs who had "scientific and technical knowledge". Such publications are examples of the Watchtower's shallow scholarship. The Evolution book is a collection of misrepresentations, quoting out of context, and other typical Society misuses of sources.
13. An excerpt of this letter was published in the Vol. 1, #4 issue of JW Research, "Angels and Women", p. 28.
65
144,000 resurrected BEFORE Jesus rose?
by tula in
1. watchtower
2. bible
according to matthew 27:52-53.

(this occurred during the time when jesus was being crucified).

"and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.".
writetoknow

Matthew 27:52-53, which seems to describe the raising of the saints immediately after the death of Jesus on the cross and their entry into the holy city after his resurrection, has long been recognized as one of the most puzzling and difficult passages in the New Testament and certainly the most perplexing in the Gospel of Matthew. It has been deservedly called a crux interpretum in the Gospel of Matthew. However, I would like to assist those who are investigating this text by calling attention to my article entitled MATTHEW 27:52-53 AS APOCALYPTIC APOSTROPHE: TEMPORAL-SPATIAL COLLAPSE IN THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW which appears in the JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE 122/3 (Fall 2003): 489-515. In this article I argue that when Matthew speaks about the raising of the saints and their entry into the holy city he is not talking about an event of the past. He is talking about an event that is still future. He is speaking of the same event that occurs in the Book of Revelation 21:2-27 and context where once again we see the entry of risen saints into the holy city. Therefore this passage is not a historical report, but a piece of apocalyptic prophecy such as we find in the Book of Revelation and other end-time literature. Matthew practices something called temporal-conflation, temporal-folding, or temporal-collapse. He takes an event of the apocalyptic future and pulls it back into the past in order to create a flash-forward effect in his narrative. Matthew 27:52-53 is best understood as a flash forward to the apocalyptic future. Those who are interested in how this approach solves the many problems of Matthew 27:52-53 might want to spend some time with this article.
Kenneth L. Waters, Sr.
Well, it doesn’t say. It doesn’t say, all it says is they came out of the graves after the resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared unto many. It is very difficult I know.
One example, might be Lazarus. I think Lazarus was raised from the dead to die again. It’s possible, that however, this was a very special group of people raised from the dead and they appeared unto many. I’m not sure that that word really can tell us much. I don’t know whether that means they actually appeared in the physical form or whether they appeared in some form where you could appear or disappear. And if that’s the case, they would be in some kind of glorified form. But because the text doesn’t say I would be a little at ease in terms of expressing dogmatism.
Let me give you my opinion however, for what it’s worth, I think they probably didn’t die again. I think this was a demonstration of the power of Christ, in His kingdom power, which would be to raise men for eternal life. So I tend to lean that way.
Question: "What is the meaning of those who were raised to life at Jesus’ death (Matthew 27:52-53)?"

Answer: Matthew 27:50-53 records, “And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split. The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.”

This event occurred as a testimony to the immortal power ascribed to Jesus Christ alone (1 Timothy 6:14-16). Only God has the power of life and death (1 Samuel 2:6; Deuteronomy 32:29). Therefore, the resurrection is the cornerstone of Christianity. All other religions and their respective leaders do not serve a risen Lord. By overcoming death, Jesus Christ immediately receives precedence because He came back to life when everyone else did not. The resurrection has given us a reason to tell others about Him and place trust in God (1 Corinthians 15:14). The resurrection has given us assurance that our sins are forgiven (1 Corinthians 15:17). Paul clearly says in this verse that no resurrection equals zero forgiveness of our sins. And, finally, the resurrection has given us a reason to have hope today (1 Corinthians 15:20-28). If Christ was not raised from the dead, then Christians would be no better off spiritually than non-Christians. But the fact is that God did raise "Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification" (Romans 4:24-25).

The raising of the saints fits into the overall rhetorical devices and strategies used by Matthew in his gospel. Examining Ezekiel 37 and the bones raised to life in connection with this story reveals that an Old Testament prophecy was fulfilled in the raising of these saints. Additionally, the raising of the saints relates directly to the coming kingdom. The raising of a few and not all of the saints shows that Jesus has power to resurrect, but also points forward to the second coming and judgment of Jesus Christ, which will include all those whose names are written in the Book Life by faith in the grace of God. Knowing that Jesus has died and conquered death through His resurrection ought to hasten our desire to repent and trust Him alone for salvation so we too can one day be resurrected “in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Corinthians 15:52).
A. The significance of the event is well summarized by one of our LCMS New Testament theologians, the late Dr. Martin Franzmann, who wrote: "The saints proceeding from their tombs and appearing in the holy city indicate that Christ's death is the victory over death, that He is the firstborn from the dead." Matthew's mention of this event, of course, was not intended to satisfy our curiosity about the details of what this event might have entailed at a personal level, but to impress on all readers in subsequent times that Christ is the Victor over death and that His resurrection guarantees our own.
27:52-53 Various strands of explanation for these two mysterious verses seem to be woven together in the New Testament. When the Messiah died as Son of Man, like all other humans before him he descended into Hades (the Hebrew Sheol was the place where the dead awaited the resurrection). The difference was that he now "descended into the lower part of the earth" (Ephesians 4:9) to bring the dead his good news of their redemption. Peter called this "a proclamation to the spirits in prison" (1 Peter 3:19). With the Messiah's resurrection those who were released "appeared to many" with their resurrection bodies. And it seems they ascended with the Messiah at the end of the forty days (Ephesians 4:7-9).
Two short verses in Matthew raise perhaps the most serious questions that can be put to a literal interpretation of the resurrection stories. Matthew said that at the moment of Jesus' death "the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many" (Matthew 27:52-53). This is an account of a miracle unsurpassed anywhere else in the gospels. It makes the postresurrection appearing of Jesus "to above five hundred brethren at once" (1 Cor. 15:6) appear tame in comparison.
In this case, many saints were raised and appeared to many. Unlike the accounts of Jesus raising Lazarus or the synagogue ruler's daughter or Jesus himself being raised, this depicts saints dead for way over "three days" being raised. And, from the phrase, "they entered the holy city and appeared to many," it is possible to infer that these many raised saints showed themselves to many who were not believers! Yet Josephus, who wrote a history of Jerusalem both prior to and after her fall, i.e., forty years after the death of Jesus, knew of Jesus but nothing of this raising of many and appearing to many. Of this greatest of all miracles, not a rumor appears in the works of Josephus or of any other ancient author. Surely at least one of the many raised out of those many emptied tombs was still alive just prior to Josephus's time, amazing many. Or at least many who had seen those many saints were still repeating the tale. Although people may have doubted that Jesus raised a few people while he was still alive and although "some doubted" Jesus' own resurrection (Matt. 28:17), who could fail to have been impressed by many risen saints appearing to many? How also could Peter have neglected to mention them in his Jerusalem speech a mere fifty days after they "appeared to many in the holy city"? Surely their appearance must have been foremost on everyone's mind. So why didn't Paul mention such a thing in his letters, our earliest sources? Why did the women who visited the "empty tomb" on Sunday morning not take notice that many other tombs were likewise open? Why didn't the visitors to Jesus' tomb mention that they had met or seen many raised saints in that vicinity, meeting them on the way to Jesus' tomb or on the way back to town? Why did the apostles disbelieve the first reports of Jesus' resurrection when a mass exit from the tombs had accompanied his resurrection? Why didn't Matthew know how many raised saints there were? Why couldn't he name a single one or a single person to whom they had appeared? How did Matthew know that these saints had come out of their tombs? That would be more than anyone had seen in the case of Jesus' resurrection.
Let's look at the implications of some of these questions. According to the literal Greek in Matthew 27:50-53, the tombs were opened and the saints were "raised" at the instant of Jesus' death, but they entered the city over a day later! Apparently, neither Joseph of Arimathea nor Nicodemus, while burying Jesus (John. 19:38-40), chanced to marvel at all the opened graves and the raised saints in them waiting patiently for Sunday morning. The women in Matthew's account were likewise oblivious to the many graves lying opened by the earthquake and the saints supposedly just beginning to leave the cemeery for town the same morning the women were arriving. And the other gospels were silent on this major miracle involving many! Paul was silent on this matter in 1 Corinthians 15, where he discussed the resurrection at great length! Peter was silent on the matter in his speech recorded in Acts 2, delivered a mere 50 days after the many saints entered the city and appeared to many! Surely the "gift of tongues" would pale in miraculous significance compared to the "raising of the many who appeared to many." Yet Peter said nothing about the latter. We are not talking about just the apostles, like Peter, being witnesses to just the resurrection of Jesus; we are talking about many people who had witnessed many saints being raised, and some of these "many" witnesses were surely present in the audience Peter preached to that morning. So why would he have had to speak at length to convince them that the resurrection of one man had happened? Having witnessed the resurrection of many, they would have readily accepted the claim that one man had been resurrected.
And what about the raised saints themselves? Wouldn't they have made terrific evangelists? But we don't read anything about that; instead, we have silence. We admit that to argue from silence is not equivalent to disproof; however, it is not the silence of extrabiblical sources that makes us doubt this account of multiple resurrections. It is the silence of other biblical authors that is generating our doubt.
A few extrabiblical sources did expand Matthew's tale of the many raised saints. These expansions were composed over one hundred years after Matthew's gospel was written. Remarkably, they even mentioned the names of some of the "many saints" raised, like Simeon and his sons, Adam and Eve, the patriarchs and prophets, etc., names that Matthew neglected to include. Of course, these expansions of the two extraordinary verses in Matthew and the list of names are found only in apocryphal gospels, which are full of all sorts of marvelous miracles that even surpass the ones attributed to Jesus in the four gospels that the church now endorses (like the story of the talking cross that followed Jesus out of his tomb in the Gospel of Peter).
Perhaps Matthew, like the authors of the apocryphal gospels, collected tales he had heard from other believers and/or composed gospel fictions. Perhaps when he composed those two short verses, he was only giving mythical form to the belief that "the resuscitation of the righteous was assigned to the first appearance of the Messiah, in accordance with the Jewish ideas" (D. F. Strauss, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined). He was also indulging in miracle enhancement: multiplying signs and wonders said to accompany Jesus' death and resurrection, i.e., Matthew's unique account of two earthquakes, one that opened the tombs of the many saints (at Jesus' death) and one that moved the stone to open Jesus' tomb (Easter morning). The other gospel writers remarkably neglected to mention that even one earthquake took place. That leaves Matthew's account on doubly shaky ground. Neither did Matthew use the most precise words to depict this wonder, because the verses state, literally, that the saints were raised at the time of Jesus' death and then lay around in their tombs for a day and a half before entering the city! That absurdity arises from what appears to be a sloppy interpolation of the phrase "after his resurrection":
And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake; and the rocks were rent; and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised: and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many (Matthew 27:50-53).
The verses make more sense without that phrase than with it. Without it, they would simply state that the raised saints immediately entered the city upon Jesus' death. But some Christian copyist, or perhaps the gospel's chief editor, felt obligated to add the phrase "after his resurrection" to ensure the priority of Jesus' resurrection, regardless of the literal consequences.
People who believe that many tombs were opened and that many saints appeared to many will of course have little trouble also believing that Jesus was resurrected. However, those of us who doubt the story of the many raised saints see in it a reflection of the kind of blind faith that made the story of Jesus' resurrection catch on in the first place.
RELATED ARTICLES
Isa.26:19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
- Ez.37:7-10 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone. And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them. Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
- Mat.27:52-53 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Matt. 27:51-53 - Grave opened, many saints raised & appeared to many.
2. How did their resurrection occur? Why did it happen? What became of them after they were resurrected?
3. What we know for sure:
a. Tombs were opened by earthquake when Jesus died.
b. Many bodies of dead saints were raised from the dead.
c. They came out of their graves after Christ was resurrected.
d. They went into Jerusalem & appeared to many.
e. THEY WERE ALIVE -- Not zombies ("a will-less and speechless human in the West Indies capable only of automatic movement who is held to have died and been supernaturally reanimated…a person held to resemble the so-called walking dead." (according to voodoo belief, jrp ) -Merriam Dictionary 4. Some have speculated they ascended into heaven (McGarvey).
-Little doubt "these resurrected are symbolic, showing that the resurrection of Christ is the resurrection of the race" (The Fourfold Gospel, 732).
5. Take a look at bodily resurrection to strengthen understanding & faith.
I. WHAT IS BODILY RESURRECTION?
A. The Life Force Is Restored To The Flesh.
1. cf. Death - Jas. 2:26.
2. cf. Resurrections from the dead:
a. 1 Kgs. 17:17-23 - Soul (nephesh, life) comes back to the body.
b. 2 Kgs. 4:32-35 - Flesh is warm (functioning, alive) once more.
c. Lk. 7:15 - Resurrected could speak.
d. Lk. 8:55 - Normal bodily functions resumed.
e. Jno. 11:14, 17, 43-44 - Another example of full bodily function.
f. Acts 9:37, 40-41 - Cognitive responses.
B. Summary Of Characteristics Of Those Raised From The Dead:
1. They were living - Lk. 24:5.
2. They had bodies - Lk. 24:36-43. (Not spirits or ghosts)
3. They were conscious & cognitive with physical activity - Jno. 12:1-2.
II. WHY WERE PEOPLE RAISED FROM THE DEAD?
A. As An Act Of Divine Mercy - cf. Lk. 7:12-13.
B. To Give Confirming Evidence Of God's Power, Presence & Approval.
1. 1 Kgs. 17:24 - By this she knew Elijah was a prophet.
2. Lk. 7:16-17 - Evidence of God's approval & presence.
3. Matt. 27:52-53 - Though not stated, we conclude the same purpose was behind these resurrections.
C. What Was Accomplished By These Resurrections? Faith In Those Who Considered & Accepted The Evidence.
1. Many believed - Jno. 11:45; 12:10-11, 17-18; Acts 9:42.
2. If true in the case of Lazarus & Dorcas, why not also Matt. 27:52-53?
-(Not a deterrent or distraction to faith, but an opportunity to glorify God - cf. Lk. 7:16).
III. WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE WHO WERE RESURRECTED?
A. They Continued To Live Out Their Lives Until Death Came - cf. 1 Cor. 15:22 ("all die").
1. 1 Kgs. 17:22 - "See, your son lives!"
2. Lk. 7:15 - "And He presented him to his mother."
3. Jno. 12:1-2 - Lazarus resumed his normal activities of life.
4. To do otherwise would defeat the purpose & lesson of resurrection!
B. What About The Saints In Matthew 27:52-53?
1. First, no direct statement of them after they "appeared to many." (So, we would do well to not conjecture.")
2. Two possibilities:
a. If they lived out their physical lives & died, it would be as others who had been raised from the dead. (Exception: Jesus - Acts 2:24; Col. 1:18; Rev. 1:18 - He will resurrect our bodies - 1 Cor. 15:20- 22).
b. If they appeared & then ascended to God's presence (paradise), they may be viewed as demonstrating "that the sting was now taken from death, that the power of the grave was broken, that men shall rise again with their bodies and be known and recognized…" (Pulpit Comm., XV:595). - cf. 1 Cor. 15:20, 22
-Lessons for us:1. Christ has power over physical & spiritual death - Jno. 11:25-26.
2. We must have faith in Him & His power over death (Rev. 1:18).
3. We will experience bodily resurrection - Jno. 5:28-29.
4. We must experience a spiritual resurrection to have the resurrection of life - Col. 2:12.
Conclusion 1. The resurrection of people in the past assures us of God's power over death. It proves Jesus is the Christ. And, as a Christian there is comfort in knowing death is not the end of our existence.
2. Are you ready for death & your resurrection?
Matt 27:52,53
27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which were dead arose,
27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Known dead people will be brought back to life in a 'spiritual' body and appear to living people in Jerusalem. That is the Gospel account of what happened the first time, and it is what Paul is empathically explaining to watch for this time.

Additionally the Gospel records, that after Jesus raised from the dead He remained on earth for 40 days and then He ascended into heaven. Paul is explaining that this is the same sequence of events that will take place at the time of the Rapture of the Church. He is demonstrating that the Ascension of Jesus into heaven is indisputably linked as a foreshadow to the Rapture of the Church. And, because the Church is called the Body of Christ this is said to be the 'Body of Christ' going up into heaven in both instances.

Paul is also saying that from the time the 'dead in Christ' raise from the dead this time, they will stay on earth for 40 days [just like their predecessors did in Matthew 27: 52,53 ] and then they will be Raptured along with those that are a live and waiting for the 40th day to arrive. The living are waiting for the 40th day because they knew the warning sign had taken place 40 days prior.

And lastly, Paul sets the timing for both the 'dead in Christ to rise' as well as the Rapture when he says that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the Jewish Feast of First Fruits and ascended 40 days later. That interpolates into the 'dead in Christ' will rise this time on the Jewish Feast of First Fruits and the Rapture of the Church will happen 40 days later. And all that comes together to say that the WARNING SIGN for the Rapture of the Church is the 'dead in Christ' rising on First Fruits!

Please see the article: SUBSTANCE & SHADOW
65
144,000 resurrected BEFORE Jesus rose?
by tula in
1. watchtower
2. bible
according to matthew 27:52-53.

(this occurred during the time when jesus was being crucified).

"and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.".
writetoknow

Isn't it amazing the confusion over this passage? Every other resurrection recorded in the scriptures were just that a resurrecton. All of a sudden we have passage no one can come up with a clear answer for.
It seems people must make their time tables fit inot personal doctrine reqarding these passages - why? Why are these verses so importand that is the real question? What if the holy ones received a resurrection to life once Christ gave his life for them. What if Christ is the fulfilment of all the prophets before him? Why shouldn't his death and sacrifice be a living testimony to every thing he preached?
Simple it doesn't not fit into doctrinal teachings - wow it not like we haven't been wrong before hum?
65
144,000 resurrected BEFORE Jesus rose?
by tula in
1. watchtower
2. bible
according to matthew 27:52-53.

(this occurred during the time when jesus was being crucified).

"and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.".
writetoknow

Throughout the scriptures ones have tried to restrict God by their interpetation of bible even when Christ walked the earth. However, each and everytime Christ did just the opposite of the commonly held view!
Shocking his listeners with forgiving sin before he became the sin offering.
So to when He simply stated time and time again that He is life and those believing in Him have life already. Of course that is not enough for most Christain, that is, the simple child like faith in a Father that loves them until they are facing death.
Thus, witnessess and other groups teach physcial teahings that restrict the power of God. Those that have been healed through prayer are discounted as mislead and so the story goes with every important subject in the scriptures.
Their fear driven life of watching every letter in the bible - thinking the scriptures are going to give them life is a life of distrust that they can't admit even to themselve.
"I am the Resurrection and the Life; the belivers in Me will live even when he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me shall never, never die, Do you believe this?
She responded "Yes Lord. I have faith that Thou are the Christ, The Son of God, who was to come into the world."
Christain teachers would have us limited Christ statements here. They would have you believe that since he was resurrected to heaven He has last power over death and He is limited to their interpretation of the scriptures that teach about the true "Word of God".
There is nothing new under the sun when Christ walked the earth Martha tried to limit Christ power by stating the her brother would be resurrected in the last day as she had been taught. Yet the "Word of God" reinterpreted her long held views.
Christ broke the mold because you see it not about legal views of God it is about faith and if you have faith God may do something that break the rules you so badly hang on to; supposing they are going to give you life.
5
Rutherford Trial 1919 Truth
by writetoknow in
1. watchtower
2. scandals
review of the 1919 trial of joseph franklin rutherford.

parts 1-3. part 1: trial of jfr et al.

references for the following: trial transcript, pages 64-71, sect.
writetoknow

reprint of the May/Jun 1994 Free Minds Journal
Sleeping with the Enemy—Watchtower Style
written by Colette Brooks
Contributing researcher: Linda Hull
A photograph in the Watchtower book,True Peace and Security, How Can You Find It?, depicts several officials of the Roman Catholic clergy rendering a Heil Hitler salute. 1 This is indicative of the Watchtower's neverending condemnation of the church, whom they allege "compromised woefully" 2 during the second world war. Yet, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Or, as Jesus so eloquently put it, "How can you take the speck out of your brother's eye when you've got a plank hanging out of your own?" Whether the Church endorsed or denounced the tenants of Nazism is not the thrust of this study. What is germane, however, is the fact that Watchtower leadership themselves attempted to compromise "woefully" with the German Reich!
The books, Jehovah's Witnesses In The Divine Purpose and Jehovah's Witnesses, Proclaimer's of God's Kingdom, report that the Nazi government confiscated Watchtower property after raiding their Magdeburg Germany headquarter's twice during 1933. 3 In response to the first raid, a "Declaration of Facts" was drafted by J.F Rutherford (2nd WT President), which they claim denounced Hitler, his government and Nazism. 4 However, this Declaration, which was reprinted in The 1934 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, represents the proverbial "skeleton" in the Watchtower's closet.
M. James Penton, author of the explosive book, Apocalypse Delayed, exposed the Watchtower's hypocrisy in an article written for the Christian Quest Journal. 5According to Penton, the Watchtower took a definitive stance against the Nazi government only after Hitler rejected their Declaration. 6 In a personal letter which accompanied the Declaration, Watchtower leaders endeavored to convince the Fuhrer that they supported the "principles" of his government--No doubt, an effort to continue their book selling activities in Germany. 7 Hitler, however, was not impressed. In the declaration of facts, Rutherford wrote:
The present government of Germany has declared emphatically against Big Business oppressors and in opposition to the wrongful religious influence in the political affairs of the nation. Such is exactly our position:...Instead of being against the principles advocated by the government of Germany, we stand squarely for such principles and point out that Jehovah God through Christ Jesus will bring about the full realization of these principles... [emphasis ours] 8
What principles did Germany advocate under Hitler's rule? The Watchtower reported the following in their publication, God's Kingdom of A Thousand Years:
Shortly after the United States was plunged into World War II, information on this Nazi plan was gleaned from seized Nazi documents....This plan aimed at a Nazi world order that Hitler, if successful in World War II, would mercilessly enforce upon the world and mankind...[He] evidently had in mind the Germanic Holy Roman Empire...At any rate, there was no reestablishment...as many people of Hitler's religion had hoped. 9
While it is quite evident that the Society didn't believe in Nazism, the Declaration reveals that they are just as guilty as they claim Christendom is for "Sleeping With The Enemy." Consequently, one must also ask, what or whom was Rutherford referring to as the so called "Big Business oppressors?" 10 He answers: "It has been the commercial Jews of the British-American empire that have built up and carried on Big Business as a means of exploiting and oppressing the peoples of many nations....This fact is so manifest in America that there is a proverb concerning the city of New York....'the Jews own it, the Irish Catholics rule it, and the Americans pay the bills.'" 11
During WWI and II the Society criticized ALL governments, including Germany, for being manipulated by the Catholic Church whom they identified as the "Great Whore Of Babylon." 12 Yet the Declaration invariably exposes their own hypocrisy.
[The] Bible Students are fighting for the SAME high, ethical goals and ideals that the national German Reich proclaimed regarding the relationship of man to God....there are no opposing views....but that, to the contrary, respecting the purely religious and apolitical goals....these are in complete harmony with....the National Government of the German Reich." 13 [emphasis ours]

As previously seen, the Watchtower publication, God's Kingdom of A Thousand Years reported that the "people of Hitler's religion" were disappointed when his plan ultimately failed. 14 How then are we to view the above quote since the Watchtower claimed to be "in complete harmony" with the apolitical and religious views of the Third Reich? 15 Consequently, anyone with the smallest historical inkling is familiar with the German Reich's "apolitical goals." 16 Only a demented man such as Hitler could orchestrate the systematic annihilation of six million Jews while calling these deeds an act of divine will! The Society even acknowledged Germany's wickedness in later Watchtower editions, accusing them of complying with "Satan's attempt to turn all men away from God and His Kingdom." 17 Moreover, in the personal letter to Hitler, they even falsely claimed the U.S. government persecuted them for refusing to publish anti-German propaganda during WWI. 18
Of course this claim totally contradicts their stand during the summer of 1918, when the Watchtower urged faithful Bible Students to purchase War Bonds. 19 In fact, they even went so far as to support a National Day Of Prayer for Germany's swift defeat. 20 Yet, the Society bashed Christendom for praying for the end of WWI in a 1985 Watchtower article. "...in 1914 when German troops marched into Belgium wearing belts inscribed with the word 'Gott mit uns' (God with us). On both sides the church was prolific in prayers for victory and vitriolic abuse of the enemy." 21 The Organization has never been lax about pointing an accusing finger at others, while ignoring their own blatant inconsistencies.
What does the Society say of this Declaration and the events surrounding it? As should be expected, they shifted the blame. In their 1974 Yearbook they claimed a German Witness "accused" another, Paul Balzereit, of altering it. 22 They even went so far as to assert that Balzereit penned the letter to Hitler, which was supposedly done behind Rutherford's back. 23 However, Penton challenged this claim:
Regardless of who wrote, edited, or 'weakened' the Declaration, the fact is that it was published as an official document of The Watch Tower Society. Thus the American leaders...and Judge Rutherford in particular--were directly responsible for what was outright anti-Semitism and a willingness to compromise their loudly trumpeted principles of 'Christian neutrality' in order to continue their publishing and preaching work in Germany... 24
Moreover, Penton also uncovered an eyewitness account of shocking proportion. Konrad Franke, a German Jehovah's Witness added this to the Nazi scandal:
...I had the privilege of traveling with Brother Albert Wandres from Wiesbaden to Berlin...But we were shocked when we arrived at the Tennis Hall (the Watchtower's Magdeburg Headquarters) the next morning...When we entered, we found the Hall bedecked with Swastika flags!...when the meeting started, it was preluded by a song which we had not sung for years...the notes were (taken from) the melody of 'Deutschland, Deutschland, uber alles'! 25 These notes were the melody for the German National Anthem! 26
Since Witnesses today are forbidden to salute national flags, were the German Bible Students under a different standard?----Apparently so, since the Society continued to cover up historical facts with revisionistic slights of hand. In their book, Paradise Restored To Mankind By Theocracy, the Watchtower again demonstrated their propensity for double-standards. "[Jehovah's Witnesses] discerned their commission...They stuck to this course even amid WWII. They stuck to an absolute Christian neutrality toward international controversies." 27
Since Rutherford previously authored two books advocating the Jews prophetic preeminence, 28 one would think an "about face" of this nature impossible. However, this "new light" was a prelude to the "Spiritual Israel/Great Crowd" doctrine. To this end, how could the Watchtower support the Jews since their very existence undermined this newest divine revelation? The Watchtower spiritualized many biblical promises made to the Jew---claiming they now applied to their "anointed class." 29 How then could the Society continue to support them? Theoretically speaking, could an anti-semite possibly be "faithful and wise," considering the fact that the King of Kings is a Jew? Do not the words "anti-semitic Christian" create a logical absurdity? Although the organization under 1st Watchtower President (Charles Taze Russell) strongly supported Zionism, Rutherford abolished this position some 16 years after Russell's death. He wrote:
...during the World War the Jews received recognition of the heathen nations. In 1917 the Balfour Declaration, sponsored by the heathen governments of Satan's organization, came forth, recognized the Jews, and bestowed upon them great favors....The Jews have received more attention at their hands than they really deserved. 30 [emphasis ours]

This represented a tremendous change from his previous writings. In his book Life, Rutherford claimed the Balfour Declaration was part of God's divine plan for bringing fleshly Israel back into His favor. 31 The Balfour Declaration paved the way for Israel's claim to Palestine, which Jehovah gave them thousands of years ago. However, Rutherford no longer believed the Jew had any part in God's plan, as evidenced by the following quote from his book Enemies: "...The Protestant clergy...with the rabbis of the Jewish religious organization, follow the lead of the Roman Catholic organization...all such practice religion, of which the Devil is the author." 32 Although their literature betrays them, they continue to distort and deny what has already been printed by their own presses. They wrote: "[Jehovah's Witnesses] have never meddled in or even taken part in the politics of any nation with which there is mudslinging and the stirring up of so many hostilities and divisive hatreds." 33 Considering Rutherford's immense hypocrisy, is it possible the following statements could provoke "hostilities and divisive hatreds" amongst the Jewish community? "Today the so called 'Protestants' and the Yiddish clergy openly co-operate with and play into the hand of the Roman Catholic Hierarch like foolish simpletons..." 34 He even went so far as to say: "Amongst her (The Whore of Babylon) instruments that she uses are the ultra-selfish men called 'Jews' who look only for personal gain." 35
One must wonder whether Rutherford ever read Romans ch.11, where Paul cautioned believers against pride over natural Israel's present state of unbelief:
You will reply, "The branches have been broken off so that I may be grafted in." Well said!...Be not haughty...For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you...if they do not persist in their unbelief...God is able to graft them in again. And if you have been cut from a naturally wild olive tree and were grafted contrary to nature...how much more readily will these natural branches be grafted into their own original tree!

The facts show that Rutherford was VERY familiar with this scripture since he expounded on it at length in his book Deliverance--commenting that there was still hope for fleshly Israel. 36 Apparently "new light" adjusted his thinking.
To add insult to injury, the Watchtower also claimed the German government organized mandatory flag salutes in the schools but Witness children refused to participate due to "conscience." 37 While we do not doubt their strict dedication to the Society's precepts, we must question the honor and integrity of Watchtower leadership. Why didn't they practice what they forced others to preach? Why did they allow hundreds of Witnesses to die in concentration camps after they themselves attempted to court the fuhrer? To this end they wrote:
The rulers, and particularly the clergy are not now proud of the record they made during the World War, and when Jehovah's Witnesses call attention to the unfaithful and wicked deeds committed then and continuously since then the clergy and their allies feel a stinging shame because they are exposed, and hence they endeavor to prevent the publication of the truth...concerning their acts during the war, their unfaithfulness to God, and their connection with the Devil. They find no glory in the record they have made and are making." 38
Consequently, we must again re-emphasize the fact that people in glass houses should never print books, literature, tracts or anything else that will aid others in finding them out.
Footnotes:
1 True Peace and Security, How Can You Find It?, (The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1986) p.25
2 The Watchtower, 1/1/89, p. 21
3 Jehovah's Witnesses In The Divine Purpose (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1959) p. 130; Jehovah's Witnesses-Proclaimer's Of God's Kingdom (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1993) p. 693-94
4 ibid.
5 M.J. Penton, "A Story Of Attempted Compromise: Jehovah's Witnesses, Anti-Semitism, And The Third Reich," Christian Quest Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring 1990, ed. M. James Penton, (Pub. Robert S. Righetti, Idyllwild, CA)
6 Ibid, p. 39
7 Ibid, p. 37-38, 42
8 1934 Yearbook Of Jehovah's Witnesses, 'Declaration of Facts', (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1933) p. 135-36
9 God's Kingdom Of A Thousand Years, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1973) p. 8, 9
10 1934 Yearbook, (above)
11 Ibid, p. 134 (Although this quote has been shortened for space consideration, it has not been taken out of context. We invite readers to read the quote in its entirety in the 1934 Yearbook)
12 Charles Taze Russell, Posthumous Work Of, The Finished Mystery (International Bible Students Association, 1917) p. 259
13 M.J. Penton, p. 79
14 God's Kingdom Of A Thousand Years, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1973) p. 9
15 M.J. Penton, p. 79
16 Ibid.
17 The Watchtower, 6/1/35, p. 166
18 M.J. Penton, . p.78
19 Watchtower Reprints, 1918, p. 6257 & 6268
20 Watchtower Reprints, 1918, p. 6271
21 The Watchtower, 8/1/85, p. 6
22 1974 Yearbook Of Jehovah's Witnesses, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1973) p. 110-11
23 Ibid.
24 M.J. Penton, p. 42
25 Ibid, [Konrad Franke's Testimony] p. 50 (Penton reported that Franke died as a Witness in good standing. See The Watchtower, 11/1/83, p.31)
26 Ibid.
27 Paradise Restored To Mankind-By Theocracy, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1972) p. 334
28 J.F. Rutherford, Life, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1929); J.F. Rutherford, Comfort For The Jews, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1925)
29 J.F. Rutherford, Vindication, Vol 2, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1932) p. 257-58; The Watchtower, 4/1/35, p. 99-108
30 J.F. Rutherford, Vindication, Vol. 2, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1932) p. 258
31 J.F. Rutherford, Life, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1929) p. 125-144
32 J.F. Rutherford, Enemies, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1937) p. 212
33 Man's Salvation Out Of World Distress At Hand!, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1975) p. 178
34 J.F. Rutherford, Enemies, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1937) p. 222
35 Ibid, p. 281
36 J.F. Rutherford, Deliverance, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1926) p. 329-31
37 Jehovah's Witnesses In The Divine Purpose, (The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1959) p. 143
38 The Watchtower, 6/1/35, p. 167
5
Rutherford Trial 1919 Truth
by writetoknow in
1. watchtower
2. scandals
review of the 1919 trial of joseph franklin rutherford.

parts 1-3. part 1: trial of jfr et al.

references for the following: trial transcript, pages 64-71, sect.

writetoknow

Review of the 1919 Trial of Joseph Franklin Rutherford

Parts 1-3

Part 1: Trial of JFR et al

References for the following: Trial Transcript, Pages 64-71, Sect. 190-213.

The Society has often spoken of the trial of Joseph F. Rutherford and the other Officers as a “Railroad” job in reference to the speed and rush to judgment to convict the Society’s officers and end the all important work of the FDS. In years past, this has been characterized as fulfilling Bible prophecy with respect to the Two Witnesses spoken of in Revelation who were killed and then came back to life.

The visions planted in many JW minds is that the seven Officers of the Society were wrongly accused, drug off in the middle of the night by jack-booted police, and quickly tried before some squint-eyed magistrate who heard only the Government testimony, then in haste banged down the gavel pronouncing guilt on these innocent men.

This series will go through this trial and see what happened. Here are the questions that will be addressed:

1. Was the trial a rush to judgment “Railroad Job”?
2. What was the Government’s allegations?
3. Did the Government have any cause of action, or a meritorious case?
4. Did the Government take time to investigate and prepare?
5. Were the Defendants given opportunity to retain counsel?
6. Were the Defendants able to delay the case to effect proper preparation?
7. Were the Defendants given consideration and leeway by the Court?
8. Did the Defendants make a good case?
9. What were the arguments of each side?
10. Was this a Trial by Jury?

Defendants:

Joseph F. Rutherford
William E. Van Amburgh,
Robert J. Martin
Frederick H. Robinson
George H. Fisher
Clayton P. Woodworth
Giovanni DeCecca
Robert H. Hirsh
A. Hugh MacMillan

A Railroad Job? - Here are the Initial Sequence of Events: Originally, there were 9 Officers Indicted by the US Government, United States District Court, Eastern District of New York. The charges were filed May 6, 1918. The first arraignment of Rutherford, VanAmburgh, DeCecca, MacMillan, Martin, and Robinson (only 6 Officers) took place May 8, 1918 before Judge Garvin. Each Defendant plead Not Guilty. Bail fixed at $2,500 for each Defendant. Each Defendant remanded to give bail and case adjourned to May 15th, 1918.

On May 9, 1918 Defendants Fisher, and Woodworth were arraigned (2 more Officers). Each plead Not Guilty with leave to withdraw same and Demur (delay) by May 15th, 1918. Bail was fixed at $2,500 each. Defendants request to Demur until may 15th, 1918 was granted.

On May 14th, 1918 Defendant Hirsh was arraigned and lead Not Guilty (last of the 9 Officers). Bail fixed at $1,000. Case for call may 15th, 1918.

Total of nine recognizances filed for all.

May 15th, 1918: before Judge Chatfield, all nine Defendants present with counsel except Hirsh. Case adjourned until June 3, 1918 for call. Defendants ordered to return on bonds.

Hirsh appeared separately on May 15, 1918 before Judge Garvin. Ordered to return June 3, 1918 on his bond.

June 1, 1918: Petitions of Defendants and Certificates of attorneys for designation of another Judge filed. Certificate of Judge Garvin filed.

June 3, 1918: Before Judge Garvin case called. Defendants present. Case referred to Judge Chatfield.

Before Judge Chatfield a;; Defendants and counsel present. Defendants ordered to return on bonds June 4, 1918.

June 4, 1918: Before Judge Chatfield. All Defendants present. Defendants asked leave to WITHDRAW their pleas and to Demur. Case transferred to Judge Howe for hearing.

Before Judge Howe: Case called, all Defendants present. Attorney for the United States moves to dismiss indictment against Hirsh. Attorneys for the other Defendants objects!. Motion granted and indictment against Hirsh dismissed. Attorneys for other 8 Defendants ask leave to WITHDRAW pleas and to Demur. Attorney for the US objects. Defense Motion granted. Defendants move to have certain papers taken under Search Warrant returned and move for Bill of Particulars. Notice of motions and Affidavits filed. Motions argued and granted as to fist and ninth requests, all other denied.

Defendants re-enter their plea of Not Guilty. US Attorney moves for trial. Defendants attorneys (more than one defense attorney by the way) move for adjournment and case set for trial at 2PM, June 5, 1918.

June 5, 1918: All defendants and counsel before Judge Howe. Trial begins and then adjourned to June 6th, 1918 at 10:30 AM. Bill of Particulars and notice and petition filed for return of papers. Motion denied.

Trial takes place over many days as follows:

June 6, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe and then suspended until June 7th, 1918 at 10:30 AM. Defendants ordered to return. June 7, 1918: Trial resumed before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 10th, 1918 at 10:00 AM. June 10th, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 11, 1918 at 10:00 AM. June 11, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 12, 1918 at 10:00 AM. June 12, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, suspended until June 13th, 1918 at 10:00 AM. June 13, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 14th, 1918. at 10:00 AM. June 14, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 17th, 1918.

June 17, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 18, 1918. June 18, 1918: trial resumes before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 19th, 1918. June 19, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, then suspended until June 20, 1918. Defendants still out on bail and ordered to return each day up to now.

June 20, 1918: Trial resumes before Judge Howe, trial concluded, verdict guilty on all counts. Motion to set aside verdict for a new trial. Defendants remanded until June 21, 1918 at 12:00 Noon. Order entered for sustenance of Jurors.

June 21, 1918: Defendants present before Judge Howe. Motions to set aside verdict, arrest judgment, fix bail, and set new trial denied. US Attorney moves for sentence.

Sentencing: Rutherford, VanAmburgh, Martin, Robinson, Fisher, Woodworth, and MacMillan sentenced each to 20 years. Sentence of DeCecca deferred until further consideration of the Court to have his past career investigated. DeCecca was sentenced to ten years by Judge Howe on July 10th, 1918.

Many more motions and court dates take place up to March of 1919 while Rutherford and the others are in Federal Prison in Atlanta, GA..

Comment: So, rather than being drug off by jack-booted police in a rush railroad job at midnight … the Defendants were out on bail. They were able to hire attorneys. The Defendants objected to the case being dismissed against their fellow, Hirsh. Defendants had time to plea Not Guilty, withdraw their Not Guilty plea, and re-enter their Not Guilty plea … have arraignment, bond, and continuances. From May 5, 1918 through June 20, 1918 the pre-trial and trial took place. Then after they were convicted, their attorneys were in court 19 times over the next 10 months until March 1919 filing motions and petitions, appeals, etc.

Was this a Railroad job? So far, it looks like the process was about normal. Letting Hirsh off the hook against the wishes of his fellow Defendants seemed like the Government was trying to be fair. Defendants even asked for and got another Judge!

The next part will get into Jury examination: It will amaze you to see that Rutherford and his team had plenty of time to participate in Jury selection and examination … and how his attorney acted.

Part 2a: JFR Trial – Judges Chambers

NOTE: Part 2 was going to be about the Jury Selection, but I decided that the debates in Judges Chambers should come first.

June 4, 1918 at 10:30 AM and June 5, 1918 at 2:00PM – Judge Howe’s Chambers (COURT)
Page 107 to 128, Sect. 321 to 383

US Attorneys for the Gov’t:
Isaac Oeland and Charles Buchner (GOVT)
Attorneys for Defense:
Fred Sparks (DEF) for Rutherford, VanAmburgh, Martin, Robinson
Jesse Fuller (DEF) for Fisher, Woodworth, DeCecca, MacMillan

Hirsh’s attorney not mentioned or present since the Governement wanted to Dismiss the case against Hirsh.

The main issues are Motions before the Court. Note that the DEF has two days in Judges Chamber to argue motions and plead their case with respect to many issues. The following are some of the highlights:

GOVT-OELAND: The only one I am particularly concerned about is the motion made by the Government as to the Dismissal of defendant Hirsh.

(Note: The DEF made nine motions for the Judge to consider. The GOVT made one motion, and that is all that concerned them. The GOVT never really fights the DEF on the other motions.)

DEF-SPARKS: We object on the ground that the defendant Hirsh is alleged as a coconspirator in this indictment, and the motion to dismiss the indictment as to him would result in making him a witness, not governed by the usual rule covering coconspirators. It makes him available as a witness without the disqualification of corroborating his testimony.

COURT: It is not necessary in this court to corroborate the testimony anyhow.

DEF-SPARKS: I think maybe your Honor is right, but I make that objection.

COURT: It is different than your state court where you have to have is corroborated. It is just a question here for the Jury. They can believe it or not, as they like, whether it is corroborated or not. I am inclined to think that the motion should be granted. Since the Government has indicted a number, it ought not be said they cannot back out. That is a right the Government has, the same as in civil suits the plaintiff can back out.

DEF-SPARKS: It does not affect the rights of the others.

COURT: If it does affect the right, you make him available as a witness, that won’t hardly be a good reason why the Court should say the Government should not back out.

DEF-SPARKS: I suppose it is always in order to admit you are wrong even if you are with the Government.

COURT: Yes, the Government is quite often wrong. You may enter the motion to dismiss the indictment as to this defendant Robert H. Hirsh, one of the defendants, is granted.

What does all this mean? Essentially, the GOVT did not want to proceed against Hirsh as a coconspirator, and motioned to dismiss the case against Hirsh. The Defense objected to the Government backing out with respect to Hirsh, because he could be called as a witness against the remaining 8 defendants. The Defense was nervous about what Hirsh might say that would harm Rutherford and the other defendants.

The Judge here seems very reasonable as he does throughout the entire trial. He admits the GOVT can be wrong. He follows the rules, and allows extensive arguments to be made by the Defense in Chambers. Notably, when the Judge confronts the Defense attorney Sparks with this, Sparks admits the Judge is right, and that the rights of the other defendants is not harmed. So, the real issue here for the defense was to try and shut Hirsh up from giving testimony.

The contention by the Society that these Officers were “railroaded” is ludicrous. There is more said in the Judges Chambers that reveals how fair the Judge is, and what an idiot JFR was in hiring Sparks to defend him. ... to be continued to Part 2b.

Part 2b: JFR Trial – Judges Chambers

Pages 110 to Sect 328 –

Judge Howe’s Chambers ... (COURT)

COURT: Have you got your Demurrer prepared?

DEF-SPARKS: With this limitation we are: Judge Chatfield suggested he was inclined to grant that with reservations, and he suggested that in the event the Demurrer was overruled, and we were permitted to plead over and went to trial again, that that Demurrer would stand for some purposes as an admission of certain allegations.

(Demur: This is a motion put to a trial judge after the plaintiff has completed his or her case, in which the defendant, while not objecting to the facts presented, and rather than responding by a full defense, asks the court to reject the petition right then and there because of a lack of basis in law or insufficiency of the evidence. This motion has been abolished in many states and, instead, any such arguments are to be made while presenting a regular defense to the petition.)

(Note: Rutherford’s attorney, Fred Sparks, seems to use their Demur as a delay tactic to rethink one’s position. On May 8th, a plea of “Not Guilty” was entered at the Arraignment hearing ... now the Defense wanted to withdraw the “Not Guilty” to Demur. They have to file a Demurrer with the Court to make this strategic change and delay the commencement of the trial.)

COURT: I would not adopt that course. If you Demur, you Demur. I should allow you to plead over. I should not hamper you. (Note: The Court here is being very fair.)

DEF-SPARKS: That is the overruling of the Demurrer and permitting us to plead again, could not be used as an admission on the trial of any formal matters of allegations of the complaint. Your Honor will so rule on that.

COURT: That would be the legal effect of overruling the Demurrer. You admit facts for the purpose of the Demurrer. Isn’t that the rule? I shall not hamper you with admissions whatever. Come in and Demur. If you lose on the Demurrer you can make another plea. (Now DEF-Sparks and DEF-Fuller tip their hands.)

DEF-SPARKS: I want to get this straight. Judge Chatfield was of the opinion if he permitted us to plead over again on the overruling of the Demurrer, that the Government could use the admissions we made.

COURT: I shall not have any such stipulation. If you file a Demurrer and it is overruled, you can plead over.

DEF:-FULLER: Without any admissions?

COURT: Absolutely. If I give you the right, I give you the whole right.

DEF-SPARKS: The admissions are only given on the arguments on the Demurrer.

COURT: That’s the rule I was taught. The Court can say, unless you stipulate so and so, I would not allow you to Demur.

GOVT-OELAND: I have no objection to the course your Honor is taking, except to say the action on the Demurrer we shall insist, and the other motions are made for delay.

What happened? Neither the Court nor the prosecution would use any admissions made in the Demurrer. The Government simply felt that the additional motions were a delay tactic. What interests me most is the fact that if the Demurrer had been sustained, what admissions would have been made for the record. I don’t know if the Demurrer in this case is on file with the court ... but it would be interesting.

So the defendants, Rutherford and company may well have ended up pleading guilty to some of the charges. As it turned out, the Demurrer was overruled, and the admissions in them would not be used against the defendants as directed by the Court and agreed to by the US Attorney. Was this a railroad Job as claimed by the Society?

In Part 2c I will post the reasons for the “delay tactic” that the Government was concerned about regarding DEF-SPARKS. And in that part we will see how Sparks hangs himself.

Part 2c – JFR Trial … Chambers

This gets really good ... keep reading

Trial, Page 112, Sect. 334, June 4th 1918, Judge Howe’s Chambers

DEF: Sparks: “We are going, if the Court pleases, in this matter we shall have to file an affidavit if we are forced to trial today, with the question of the indictment being in the shape it is, that the time in this case has been so short to prepare for trial it is physically impossible for me to prepare. If your Honor will give me opportunity to – …”

COURT: “You say you have not been able to get the case ready. When was the Indictment filed?”

DEF-Sparks: “The 8th of May.”

COURT: “If you were so busy, you should have told the defendants so.”

DEF-Sparks: “We have been busy in this case, we notified the Government we could not be ready.”

COURT: “You will have to make a strong showing to get a continuance.”

DEF-Sparks: “You Honor, on first flush, seemed so reasonable I think we could show that.”

COURT: “I hope I shall be reasonable on second flush. I won’t make any difference with the progress of the trial by filing the Demurrer. I should do that any time. Even after we have the Jury.

[Note: I will discuss the Demurrer and the Court denials in another post.]

… Later that day …

COURT: “I overrule your Demurrer on each ground. You presented two grounds of Demurrer. I will overrule it as to each and give an exception to each of the defendants to the overruling of their Demurrer. How about your motion for a continuance?”

DEF-Sparks: “We have not made it now, because of your dismissal of the Demurrer.”

COURT: “I understood you wanted a continuance.”

DEF-Sparks: “Yes –

COURT: “You may now enter your pleas of Not Guilty for each defendant.”

DEF-Sparks: “We will now make a motion to your Honor for a continuance in this case, on the ground that we have not had sufficient time to sufficiently prepare this case for trial, and in support of that motion we state that on the 8th of May, this indictment was found against these defendants; that I believe on the 12th of May I went down to Washington [DC] and had a conference with the Attorney-General, the purpose of which was to see whether a general agreement on """all the works""" of this Association could not be reached with a view of eliminating the publication of any matters the Government considered seditious.”

COURT: “How is that material?”

DEF-Sparks: “It is only material to show how little time we have has to prepare this case.”

COURT: “You gave your attention to carrying on your business there than to getting ready.”

DEF-Sparks: “We supposed we could dispose of the entire proposition. We were looking at it from a Government proposition. The Government wanted to accomplish a certain thing. It wanted to eliminate what it designated as religious propaganda, and we were trying to get the Government to state how they wanted us to act in the elimination of that religious propaganda. We assured the Government there was no intent on the part of any member of this Association to impede the draft law, and that we would do certain things without prejudice.

“We left the situation with the Attorney-General. He was to take it up with his superior and pass on that as a Government proposition and see whether it was not better from a Government standpoint to reach an agreement with us as to future conduct of this Association, the Government having sent out a telegram to its local Association saying to people who violated in the past were not prosecuted, but only those who, after intentionally persisted in the sale of this literature. The matter came on for pleading to withdraw our plea on the 15th of May. I stated in open court I had been in Washington [DC] in the hope we would be able to reach some agreement with the Government on this matter, and we did not go into the preparation of this case because we did not feel it would be necessary.”

COURT: “I should hold that was no excuse for not getting ready to try a case. Your clients are indifferent. You devote your time making an agreement for future conduct. Have you succeeded in making an agreement?”

DEF-Sparks: “No.”

COURT: “I doubt if you will. Suppose you did? You go to Washington and give attention there rather than to the District Attorney here, who has this charge.”

DEF-Sparks: “We assumed if we reached an agreement, these cases would not be prosecuted.

COURT: “In other words, you gave attention to having the case withdrawn rather than defending it.

My Comments: What was going on here was that the Judge may have granted a continuance, but Sparks would have to have good reasons. His reasons were lacking. Sparks was to busy screwing around with deals.

The bigger issue I also see, is that Sparks & his Clients, JFR & Company were willing to cut a deal with the Government to not publish certain things, preach certain things, or engage in certain acts that violated the law … if the Government would only drop the case. So, JFR was not concerned about publishing “Truth” but cutting deals through his lawyer to curb what he said in exchange for staying out of the Gray-Bar Hotel. Judge Howe saw through this crap, and denied the motion for a continuance.

There is more on this that will be an eye-opener.

Part 2d: JFR Trial – Judges Chambers

Judge Howe’s Chambers: Transcript Pages 119 – 120, Sections 357-361

Interesting reasoning on the Defense Attorney Sparks as to what he needs to get ready for trial. That part is bolded.

COURT: You had from the 8th of May.

DEF-Sparks: No; because they did not elect on which indictment they would proceed.

COURT: Did anyone in authority tell you they would not proceed on this indictment?

DEF-Fuller: They have three other indictments.

DEF-Sparks: Judge Chatfield said we would be notified on which indictment they would be tried.

COURT: Similar Indictments?

DEF-Sparks: No; trading with the enemy and this conspiracy.

COURT: You have been indicted from the 8th of May. Of course, it would be your duty to get ready for trial. It is the policy of the Government to try this case.

DEF-Fuller: Your Honor does not seem to realize the time taken going to Washington was time taken out.

COURT: That was poor judgment.

DEF-Fuller: Everything done, time going, the discussion, in preparation. This is a religious organization.

COURT: Then they should be more quickly ready to explain their situation.

DEF-Fuller: The organization expected to complete seven works. There is a question of intent in a paragraph of one of these books.

COURT: that is a question of fact for the jury.

DEF-Fuller: We are told that this religious volume is used as a subterfuge.

COURT: The question of intent is a question of fact.

DEF-Sparks: How can we tell by the cover of the book what the intent is? We have to study the book. We have to study the whole religious propaganda.

COURT: I think you have the ability to tell whether this would tend to insubordination or disloyalty or refusal of duty. Why don’t the District Attorney tell what parts he objects to?

DEF-Sparks: That’s what we want.

COURT: I will see that you get it. What parts are they?

GOVT-Oeland: 247 and 253. There are two other places in the book, a half a column in the book, backing that up.

COURT: Can you specify the portions of that book? Also tell them the sermons, lectures and where delivered. Have you any more motions for a continuance, Mr. Fuller?

GOVT-Oeland: There are seven letters, no sermons and no lectures.

(The Court directed the District Attorney to furnish the attorneys for the defendants with copies of the letters to be used by the Government, and the portions of the books to be used by the Government.)

My observations so far: First, points in favor of the Defense: By today’s standards, with heavy court dockets, the time of one month to prepare for trial is short. And I would have expected the District Attorney for the Government to have provided copies of the documents in question sooner, and to have made the indictment slightly more specific. Sparks took exception to every one of the Judges denials, and the Judge agreed to preserve every right of the Defendants under these exceptions. It was these exceptions among other pre-trial acts that allow attorneys for Rutherford & company to keep working on their release, which they achieved 18 months later. Also, the Prosecution was kind enough not to fight the Defense on these motions. They let the Defense hang itself with Judge Howe.

Points in the Prosecutions favor: Sparks and Fuller spent way too much time going to Washington D.C. to try and head off the trial by influencing the Attorney General, and cutting deals. They could have hired additional counsel from another firm to prepare for trial, or do the politicking for them, saving time. It was not as though Rutherford was short on funds to pay for additional expert help. Sparks argument that he needs to “study the whole religious propaganda” (Dogma) of the Bible Students is an obvious ploy to get a continuance. Taking his statement at face value, he could then argue the need to review 40 years worth of Watchtower magazines and/or at least the Seven Volume Series of Studies in the Scriptures referred to by Fuller.

Lastly, the American judicial system was originally based on the concept of a ‘speedy’ trial. This was done to change earlier methods where defendants may be held for months or years before having their day in court. In most jurisdictions there is a time limit, such as 60 to 90 days from the initial arrest until a defendant is on trial. If that time expires the Prosecution risks not being able to go forward, and being forced to drop charges. Usually, everything is done within that time frame, and any delay is because the Court grants a continuance to allow the Defense more time to prepare the case, cut a plea bargain deal, or other mitigating circumstances. So the 30 days from arrest until the Trial commenced is not all that unreasonable even by today’s standards. Also, what is not understood by JWs is that the Defendants knew from April 6th, 1918, a month prior to their arrest, that they were under investigation by the District Attorney ... so this gave them some additional time to retain legal counsel and prepare.

In Part 3: The Full Indictment
In Part 4: Jury Selection
In Part 5: Cross-examination

The cross-examination is the really good stuff.

Part 3: JFR Trial – The Indictment

[Note: If you do not have time to read the summarized indictment, then read my Summary Comments below. This gets good.]

JW Views of the events: The Society gives the JWs the impression that the indictment against Rutherford & company was all about the ”Finished Mystery book, and the prophetic fulfillment that all-important book played in the ‘death’ of the ‘two Witnesses’ spoken of in Revelation. It was meat in due season! Spiritual food for which Satan and his worldly government found offensive enough in its declaration of God’s Kingdom, that they railroaded Rutherford and company off to prison ... aka persecution. Satan did not want Jehovah’s Kingdom declared as the incoming King-elect, Jesus Christ was taking his Throne in heaven ... and expelling Satan and a third of the angels to earth. This is big stuff, and JWs were made to feel that this event had major Biblical significance!

Introduction re: Indictment: The indictment is long, repetitive, with much use of legalese wordiness. I will open with the initial phrases in the Indictment used to introduce Count 1, but eliminate the repetitive “Official-ese” by summarize the unique aspects of Counts 2, 3, and 4.

Before you read it, there are a couple of items to understand.

1. The Society and its named defendants were under investigation for months. The Grand Jury met between April 3rd, 1918 through May 6th, 1918 to consider the evidence and decide on an Indictment. The Indictment was issued May 6th, 1918, and arrests were made May 8th, 1918. When a Grand Jury convenes, often the ‘potential’ defendants get wind of this, or may even be called to give testimony prior to an indictment. Defendants are not accompanied by lawyers before Grand Juries. Other than the language in the Indictment itself, I understand that the testimony given is not used directly in the Trial.

2. Grand Jury hearings and testimony are sealed, and never released to the public. The only way we can know of anything stated in Grand Jury sessions is if one of the ‘witnesses’ decides to speak publicly. I have no direct information on what Rutherford or his legal team knew prior to May 8th, 1918, but I suggest the possibility that the Defense was aware of these proceedings based in comments made during pre-trial. If true, then this “awareness” would have given them additional time to make pre-trial preparations.

3. The Search Warrants issued were both in Pennsylvania and New York, allowing the Government to seize records and documents at both locations. Some JWs have the idea that only the New York Headquarters was raided. Additional documentation was provided directly by witnesses not associated with the Society, and some associated and known as members of the Bible Students.

4. The ”Finished Mystery” book was NOT a major part of the evidence collected as implied by the Society. Rather it was other documentation that was mostly the bone of contention ... primarily correspondence between the officers of the Society and individuals on “Active Duty” in the United States Military during a Declared War. This is the crux of the Government’s case.

The Indictment: “At a Stated Term of the District Court of the United States of America, for the Eastern District of New York, begun and held in the Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, within and for the District aforesaid, on the third day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eighteen, and continued by adjournment to and including the sixth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eighteen.

Eastern District of New York as:

The Grand Jurors of the United States of America, within and for the district aforesaid, on their oaths present that on the sixth day of April, nineteen hundred and seventeen, a joint resolution was adopted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States declaring a state of war between the United States of America and the Imperial German Government, and that on said date the President of the United States of America issued a proclamation that such a state of war existed, and continually from the said date until the present time an open and public war was and is still being prosecuted and carried on between the United States of America and the said Imperial German Government.

That during the period from the sixth day of April, nineteen hundred and seventeen, to the date of the filing and presentation of this Indictment the United States has been at war with the Imperial German Government, and during said period of time Joseph F. Rutherford, William E. Van Amburgh, Robert J. Martin, Fred H. Robinson, George H. Fisher, Clayton J. Woodworth, Giovanni De Cecca, and A Hugh MacMillan (hereinafter called defendants), at the Borough of Brooklyn, County of Kings, State and Eastern District of New York and within the jurisdiction of this Court, unlawfully and feloniously did conspire, combine, confederate and agree together, and with divers other persons to the said Grand Jurors unknown, to commit a certain offense against the United States of America, to wit: the offense of unlawfully, feloniously and willfully causing insubordination, disloyalty and refusal of duty in the military and naval forces of the United States of America when the United States was at war, to the injury of the military and naval forces of the United States of America, and to the injury of America, in, through and by personal solicitations, letters, public speeches, distributing and publicly circulating throughout the United States of America a certain book called “Volume VII, Bible Studies, The Finished Mystery,” and distributing and publicly throughout the United States certain articles printed in pamphlets called “Bible Student’s Monthly,” “Watch Tower,” “Kingdom News” and other pamphlets not named, which said book and pamphlets were to be published and distributed throughout the Eastern District of New York, and throughout other sections of the United States of America, and which said solicitations, letters, speeches, articles, books and pamphlets would and should persistently urge insubordination, disloyalty and refusal of duty in the said military and naval forces of the United States of America, to the injury of the United States of America, and to its military and naval forces. The said defendants, and each of them, in furtherance of said conspiracy did commit the following:

(Note: Each Count restates the same type of language above, so I have simply culled out the legal jargon, and summarized each Count. I have inserted “ ... ” where such introductory language is eliminated. Also, I have Bolded certain elements of the Counts those items new to me, and stand out as more serious than what was published in the Finished Mystery book.)

FIRST COUNT:

1. ... the said defendants, and each of them, did compile and caused to be compiled certain reports, and did add to them certain original writings, in the production of a book, hereinbefore mentioned, called “Volume VII, Bible Studies, The Finished Mystery,” ...

2. ... the said defendants, and each of them did publish and cause to be published the said book,” ... and did cause the same to be copyrighted in the name of the People’s Pulpit Association.

3. ... the said defendants, and each of them, did distribute and cause to be distributed to one Jerry De Cecca and one Carmelo Nicita, while said Jerry De Cecca and Carmelo Nicita were members of the military forces of the United States of America, attached to Camp Devens, and to certain other persons to the Grand Jurors unknown ... the said book ...

4. the said defendants, and each of them, received a letter written in Italian from one Frank D’Onofrio, at that time a member of the military forces of the United States of America, addressed to the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, ... made and caused to be made a translation into English, a true and correct copy ...

5. ... the said defendants, and each of them, did distribute and cause to be distributed to Carmelo Nicita and Jerry De Cecca, members of the military forces of the United States of America, copies of the translation of the said ... letter ...

6. ...the said defendants, and each of them, reprinted and caused to be reprinted a certain letter which they had received, dated the nineteenth day of September, nineteen hundred and sixteen, signed by Clara Cerulli, containing an account of the trial of one Remigio Cuminetti, an alleged member of the International Bible Students Association, for a violation of the military law in Italy ... and each of them, did distribute and cause to be distributed to various persons whose names are to the Grand Jurors unknown ...

7. ... the said defendants, and each of them, did cause to be printed and distributed throughout the United States of America, particularly men subject to become members of the military forces of the United States, to wit; men liable to be selected under Act of Congress approved May 18, 1917 for the military service ... an affidavit subscribed and sworn to by William E. Van Amburgh ...

8. ... did send or cause to be sent to one Jerry De Cecca, who was at the time a member of the military forces ... certain letters ... schedule G ...

9. ... did send and cause to be sent to one Carmello Nicita, who was at that time a member of the military ... certain letters ... Schedule H ... Schedule I ... All against the peace and dignity of the United States of America and contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and provided.

SECOND COUNT: (Repeated the same long introduction as above, except near the end:) ... ... persistently urge failure and refusal on the part of available persons to enlist in the military and naval forces of the United States and should and would, through and by the means above mentioned obstruct the recruiting and recruiting service of the United States ... to the injury of that service ...

(Sub-Counts 1 through 9 are the same as Item 1 of First Count)

THIRD COUNT: (Repeated nearly the same long introduction as above, except in addition to listing books, magazines and pamphlets, they added the ‘letters’ from above as Schedules B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I ... and near the middle of the Third Count said:) ... ... did unlawfully, willfully and feloniously attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny and the refusal of duty in the military and naval forces of the United States ... and by means of personal solicitations, letters, ...

(No Sub-Counts were stated, but considered the same incorporated by reference of the above Schedules.)

FOURTH COUNT: (Repeated nearly the same long introduction as above in the Third Count, except near the end of the Fourth Count said:) ... ... intending and attempting to cause and influence various persons available for military duty to fail to register and to refuse to submit to registration and draft for service in said military and naval forces and to fail and to refuse to enlist for services therein and by inciting others so to do, notwithstanding the requirements of said laws in that behalf and notwithstanding the patriotic duty of such persons and others to so register and submit to registration and draft so ... and notwithstanding the cowardice involved in such failure and refusal, all of which was to be accomplished by the use of all means and methods aforesaid as a protest against and as a forcible means of preventing, interfering with, hindering, and delaying the execution of said laws of the United States and also to interfere with hinder and delay the Government of the united States in its lawful efforts to build up and maintain an Army for the carrying on of said war ...

(No Sub-Counts were stated, but considered the same incorporated by reference of the above Schedules.)

Melville J. France,
United States Attorney for the
Eastern District of New York

(Note: All the Exhibits and Schedules are included in my Transcript except the “Finished Mystery”. I have a separate copy of that book. However, the “missing pages removed as a result of this trial are discussed in the Trial.)

Summary Comments: The Society would have JWs believe that the charges were trumped up and only involved some ‘spiritual truths, meat in due season’ found in the “Finished Mystery” book, and that the Society was simply publishing their beliefs on God’s Word, the Bible. The truth is, there were many Schedules and Exhibits involved that were more damning than the “book”, AND the Society’s officers and members were inciting people on active duty in the military and those about to be drafted to insubordination, refusal of duty and mutiny. This was far more serious than I ever understood as a JW.

Further, it is very important to understand that the Government needed to establish that the Bible Students were not an organized religion recognized for conscious objection, because they had no required Creed! This is why Joseph Rutherford subsequently strengthened the JW Creed, and forced the congregations of Bible Students to Register with the Society, and changed their religion into a controlled hierarchical system! This is why to this very day the Society has all JW congregations remind young JW men each year to register with the Selective Service upon reaching 18 years of age ... to avoid a similar lawsuit.

In subsequent parts, you will see that the Government proves that Joseph Rutherford & company were guilty as sin of the stated charges ... and that is why they were convicted. You will se that the Writ of Error was NOT any kind of “Exoneration” as claimed by the Society ... as a matter of Law they were not ever exonerated ... stay tuned ... to be continued ...

NEXT: Part 4 onward...

back to Watchtower Museum

4
Watchtower Dooms Day Dates
by writetoknow in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
three worlds p175, sis2 p170, our lord's return p27, proclaimers p133 footnote.

idea was abandoned in wt 9/1 1952 p542 .

anonymous: jehovah's witnesses - proclaimers of god's kingdom, 1993. current official history of the jws.
writetoknow

"Generation" Concept Returns!
a Commentary by Gary Busselman
In 1995 the Watchtower Society put away it's aging prediction that identified those living in 1914 as "the generation" Jesus spoke of that would "not pass away" before the advent of Armageddon. Complacency set in. Judging by Society-published reports, there is a waning of enthusiasm within the ranks, and the Watchtower Society is confronted with the dilemma of (1) not wanting another doomsday prediction to have to deal with later and (2) the need to deal with the unmistakable reality of their sinking meeting attendance and field service reports (and donations) from the congregations.
Nothing motivates people quite like fear and guilt. Yet it seems, for a brief window of time, the Society loosened it's grip on both tactics. The clear message that the congregations are now sending to Watchtower headquarters is this: "We won't work as hard without the threat of imminent doom." The Watchtower Society's leaders have been listening and have just responded in an important way. The previously problematic word "generation" had been dealt with by the use of characteristically ambiguous terms, only for them to find that their business goals and needs will not be met using current abstract terms.
Realizing that the re-defining of "generation" obviously will not be enough to keep the masses working diligently, the Governing Body has begun to emphasize some equally familiar terms, such as, "age," "day," and "time," and to apply to them the former meaning of "generation." Again, we have "old" words with "new" definitions. "Generation" has returned!
The Watchtower reintroduced the time-link concept with the familiar word "generation" as a thinly veiled, present day comparison to Noah's end time "day." Note the following:

18 Present-day ridiculers may think: 'Nothing has changed since creation. Life goes on, with people eating, drinking, getting married, and raising families. Even if Jesus is present, he will not execute judgment in my day.' How wrong they are! If they do not die from other causes in the meantime, the fearinspiring day of Jehovah will definitely overtake them, just as cataclysmic destruction in the Flood brought an end to a wicked generation in Noah's day. (The Watchtower, March 1, 1997, p. 19)

Here the start of Armageddon is tied to the lifetime of "present-day ridiculers." This is simply an upside-down return of the old "generation" viewpoint that usually presented Armageddon within the lifetime of the present day faithful.

Note, however, that this prophecy tells us that the Creator not only will get to the root of the problem by eliminating greedy people but will do so in our time. Why can we make this statement? Well, the prophecy says that God goes into action at a time when man is "ruining" the earth. When those words were written nearly two thousand years ago, man lacked both the numbers and the means to do that. But the situation has changed. "For the first time in its history," notes the book Protecting the Tropical Forests—A High-Priority International Task, "humanity is today in a position to destroy the bases of its own survival not just in individual regions or sectors, but on a global scale."
"The appointed time" when the Creator will act against "those ruining the earth" is near. (Awake!, March 22, 1997, p. 13)

They have simply replaced the word "generation" with "time." Also:

You may wonder, though, 'Have not these conditions always plagued mankind? How do we know that our modern generation is the one foretold in these ancient prophecies?' Let us consider three lines of evidence that proves that Jesus was talking about our time.
First, while there was a partial, early fulfillment in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, . . .
Second, in this century some features of Jesus' sign are being fulfilled in what we might call the ultimate degree. For example, is there any room for wars to become much worse than they have been since 1914?
Third, the sign of the last days is especially convincing when taken as a whole. All told, when we take into account the features Jesus mentioned in the three Gospels, those in Paul's writings, and those in Revelation, this sign has dozens of features. A person might quibble about them one at a time, arguing that other ages have seen similar problems, but when we consider all of them together, they point an unmistakable finger at only one age—our own. (The Watchtower, April 1, 1997, p. 7-8)
And when we consider the prophecy recorded at 2 Timothy 3:1-5, it is like listening to nightly news reports. It identifies our era as "the last days" . . . (ibid., p. 10)
2 Jehovah promises: "Just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more. (ibid., p. 14)
3 In 1914 this world entered its "last days." (2 Timothy 3:1-5, 13) We are now 83 years into that period and are nearing its end when, as Jesus foretold, the following will take place: "There will be great tribulation . . . (ibid., p. 15)

Note that just about every word the Watchtower's writers have available to them is used: time, day, age, era, period, generation (again), and interestingly, "century." It clearly is the intent of these three publications to reinsert a sense of urgency (fear) back into the group members to serve as the launching pad for the annual spring recruiting drive and the traditional "peak" publisher time period. This has been an incredibly successful tactic for the Society in the past. Will it work once more?
The setup for the return of "generation" is sealed with this article:

18 In the early 1920's, a featured public talk presented by Jehovah's Witnesses was entitled "Millions Now Living Will Never Die." This may have reflected overoptimism at that time. But today that statement can be made with full confidence. Both the increasing light on Bible prophecy and the anarchy of this dying world cry out that the end of Satan's system is very, very near!
18 (a) Why can we confidently expect that "millions now living will never die"? (The Watchtower, Jan. 1, 1997, p.11)
back to
Watchtower History
back to
Free Minds Home Page

writetoknow

Posts by writetoknow

Interpretation and Theology

Biblical Overview

Refuting Jehovah's Witnesses